I was thinking about the difference
between Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and Civil Society Individuals (CSI)
in Nigeria and feeling that the latter are very prevalent and extremely harmful
to the sector. Previously, I was more familiar with CSI as the acronym for
Crime Scene Investigation, one of my favourite television programmes, rather
than anything existing in development! I wanted to blog on this CSO/CSI matter
because in recent months concerns have been expressed about shrinking civic
space in Nigeria. I am very alive to this issue which poses a huge threat to
the quality of Nigeria’s democratic growth.
However, as civil society voice such concerns, they should also
recognise that some within their own ranks are very much part of the problem,
rather than part of the solution.
If CSOs are
truly acting in the interest of increasing accountability, transparency and
working to help those they claim to represent, this mandate does not lend
itself to operating as a CSI. In comparing CSOs and
CSIs there is one fundamental difference – the former leads with vision and
purpose, whilst the latter leads with ego and arrogance - this applies to any
organisation... It is important that
such individuals are not only focused on the causes they claim to represent,
but also the characteristics, principles and values they transmit to staff, supporters
and other observers.
Legitimacy
and credibility are what makes CSO operations and advocacy effective in civic
spaces.
This requires attention to internal governance and accountability - basically CSOs
practicing what they preach as “demand side” actors. Generally, CSIs operate in an “Oga at the top”
structure, rather than creating functional organisations where staff feel safe
to challenge and keep their jobs. It is easy to spot such “bullish” leadership
and management styles, which I consider a travesty, particularly in the CSO
sector, as this flies in the face of social justice which civil society exists
to protect. People are exposed to intimidation, exploitation and victimisation
operating in such spaces, by those who should know better. There are high risks for individuals working
in this “unregulated space” and organisations supporting the sector. Organisations which have poor job security and
management will not attract good professionals – perhaps this is intentional to
avoid internal challenge. CSIs cannot
produce a credible organisational strategy when seeking funding because this is
not how they are wired – they start…(and end) with a project proposal to get
money! CSIs are not really interested in
growth, but driven by greed, and therefore just as corrupt as those they criticise. Perhaps this is where a Crime Scene Investigation
is needed! I support the efforts of Anti-Corruption Agencies and other
accountability institutions in calling CSIs to account, because they rob
citizens of resources; pose barriers to development and reduce the credibility
of CSOs by their actions. I think these factors contribute to
shrinking civic space more than any actions taken by Government, because civic
space naturally shrinks if not used
effectively.
CSOs should consider ways to self-regulate,
strengthen and embark on a serious cleansing process to remove corrupt elements
that give others a bad name and make it difficult to progress serious
causes. I have great admiration for some
of the CSOs I have encountered in Nigeria, who are clearly up to the task
required of demand side actors and are bravely working in the interest of the
country. But CSIs motivated by greed,
who see civic space as a “chopping” space must be held to account by those who
are committed to tackling corruption in all its harmful forms.
Sonia Warner
Sonia Warner
Comments
Post a Comment