5

Distinction between democratic governance and 'participatory democracy'

Citizenry as Sovereign Body Politic; and Government's role and accountability as servant, facilitator and leader in a working democracy

People,s collective self-empowerment through 'building-blocks' synergies

Human development and social harmony

Governing to serve the legitimate social, economic, political and cultural rights of the people

  1. Total Human Development and Harmony Through Synergism

  2. Holistic Health Care and Medicine

  3. Deep Ecology and Harmony with Nature 

  4. Sense of History and Sense of Mission

  5. Civics and Democratic Governance

  6. Culture as Community Creativity

  7. Light-Seeking and Light-Sharing Education

  8. Gender Sensitivity, Equality & Harmony

  9. Reconstructive/Restor-ative Justice

10. Associative Economics, Social Capital and Sustainable Development

11. Synergetic Leadership and Organizations

12. Appropriate/Adaptive Technology

13. Mutual Enrichment of Families and Friendships

14. Human Dignity and Human Harmony: Human Rights and Peace

15. Aesthetics Without Boundaries: 'Art from the Heart'   

.

The Growing Power of NGOs

in the Philippines*

By By Danilo Songco

Then Secretary-General of the Caucus of Development NGO Networks (CODE-NGO) and convenor of the Asia-Pacific Sustainable Development Initiatives (‘APSUD’), which was held at the Ateneo de Manila University on November 20-23, running parallel to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Manila.

This article was published in The Sunday Chronicle, December 1, 2009 WHAT are these NGOs and why are they saying these things about APEC? And why is the government reportedly wary that the NGOs may spoil the Philippines’ coming-out party from being the sick man of Asia?

WHAT are these NGOs and why are they saying these things about APEC? And why is the government reportedly wary that the NGOs may spoil the Philippines’ coming-out party from being the sick man of Asia?

The country has achieved economic growth in the past few years that is unprecedented in the past two decades. This has brought about a tremendous increase in business and burgeoning middle class. This has also expanded the boundaries of democracy and allowed for greater political stabiity.

Unfortunately, this prosperity is enjoyed by a mnority in our population. A large number of people still live in poverty and remain outside or in the margins of political and economic decision-making. While government statistics indicate that poverty has been decreasing in past years, there is still a substantial gap between the rich and the poor. Although the World Bank has classified the Philippines as a developing country, a study of the United Nations Development Programme showed that the human development index of the country remains at the level of some Third World Countries.

It is a similar situation that precipitated social unrest in the late 60s.
Philippine NGOs have figured prominently in various stages of the struggle for social change. From the welfare agencies that provided relief during the period of reconstruction after the Second World War to the rural development and cooperatives movement in the 50s that rise to the social and political activities of the 70s, to the various family, corporate and scientific foundations in the early sixties and later to the social development agencies of the 70s and 80s.

Undoubtedly, however, the “golden era” of the NGOs was in the decades of the late 60s up to the early 80s. NGOs played a key role in defending democracy and providing an alternative means to social transformation in the period before, during and after the martial law regime. Prefaced by the rise in the rural development and cooperative movement which, in turn, were spurred by the socialist and communist movements of the 30s, and assisted in part by the family, corporate and scientific foundations, NGOs found themselves in the midst of social crisis when martial law was declared in 1972.

The advant of the authoritarian regime pushed the first quarter stormers into two directions: some went up the mountains to join the armed rebellion while others continued their open and legal organizing work with marginalized sectors. The repression brought about by dictatorial rule only served to fan the defiant mood of the youth, sectoral organizing work escalated rather than tapered off as the dctator became more aggressive in quelling political opposition.

Soon, the churches, both Catholic and Protestant, joined the ranks of the militants. The haven provided by the church escalated rural as well as urban poor organizing. Frustrated with the Establishment but unattracted to the armed struggle, students and the youth sought meaning in their young lives by organizing more NGOs in the late 70s. Called social development agencies, these NGOs went into more focused community-based or sectoral progrms such as health, appropriate technologies and socio-economic work.

The Batasan Elections of 1978, the first “open” electoral exercise uder martial law congealed the various social movements into confronting the dictator. Although some chose to keep away from this exercise , the social activists saw this as an opportunity to raise the (level of) awareness of the citizenry. The high level of politization brought some NGOs together to form coalitions and networks later in the 70s. The phenomenon, on the other hand, helped prod consensus-building and united action which made participation in the 1986 snap election and later the EDSA Revolution a logical progression.

It was the organized groups that first trooped to EDSA before the emboldened citizenry massed up to finally drive away the dictator and usher in a new democracy.
The period of the newly-restored democracy both served to raise to greater heights as well as diffuse NGOs and other social movements encouraged by Cory Aquino, a popular president. NGOs and Pos joined together to cull their various sectoral development agenda in an attempt to influence the Aquino government’s policies. Overnight, NGOs and Pos mushroomed to challenge the expanse of democracy Other NGOs were organized primarily to take advantage of the massive inflow of development assistance. However, the absence of a common enemy, and later frustrated by the lack of support by the lack of support from the president herself , development NGOs and POs took different tracks in pursuing development. Instead of dampening their energies, however, this has only served to encourage them further.

Several decades hence, the work started by the NGOs in the 50s remains as relevant as ever. They have helped to oprganize the people’s organizations of farmers, fisherfolk, urban poor, and other disadvantaged sectors to enable them to make decisions for themselves and to take active part in shaping public policy to improve their lot. NGOs have created the models of community and grassroots structures that have challenged prevailing injustices in the various stages of our social, economic and political life. At the same time, they have brought relief and progress to the lives of the people they have organized.

As a result, the Philippines boasts of a thriving private-sector-led development community, much unlike in its economically-advanced neighbors in the region. The vibrant development community has been the source of various development models from small community organizations, member-orgsanizations of the Philippine Business for Social Progress (PBSP) and the Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (PHILDHRRA). NGOs are experimenting with integrated area development models either independently or in partenrship with government agencies.

The Partnership of Philippine Support Service Agencies (PHILSSA) is experimenting with a similar model in an urban setting. Micro-credit and livelihood projects have been developed into high-scale marketing systems with their own processing, warehousing and transport facilities by the members of the National Confederation of Cooperatives (NATCCO). At the end of 1995, the primary and secondary cooperatives of NATCCO had consolidated assets of more than nine billion pesos. A host of NGOs and people’s organizations are involved in various levels of cooperation and advocacy for reforms with their respective local government units. This spate of NGO/PO engagements with local government has spurred great interest nationally and internationally about the relevance of people’s participation in local governance. These and many other models of development have contributed to making the Philippine NGO community one of the most advanced in the world.

In the past five years, NGOs have been the source of social legislation and other policies that attempt to address inequities in our country. Their advocacy, in tandem with the basic sectors, forged the Comprehensive Agrarial Reform Law that redistributes land to the tiller. The Urban Development and Housing Act that provides for urban land reform and social housing for the urban poor, the Women in Nation-Building Act and the Anti-Sexual Harassment Law, which serve to protect women’s rights and improve their social standing, and the provision of adequate modes of participation in al levels of local governance in the Local Government Code. Throush various forms of social pressure, the president has established the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) and the Social Reform Council (SRC).

The PCSD is the primary government-NGO/PO body that will oversee the implementation of government’s comitments under Agenda 21 of the World Conference on Environment and Sustainable Development. The SRC, which is chaired by the President himself, shall be responsible for overseeing the implementation of Social Reform Agenda – a companion program to President Ramos’ Economic Reform Agenda under his Philippines 2000. The Social Reform Agenda is culled from the DevelopmentAgenda formulated by various basic-sector organizations and NGOs as policy proposals to the Aquino administration.

In recent years, and as a recognition of their effectiveness, donor agencies have provided large amounts of financial and technical assistance to NGOs in support of their work. Apart from funds that are mobilized individually in the pursuit of their objectives, the NGO community has raised and is managing forthemselves nearly a billion pesos for various programs. These funds have come in the form of debt-for-nature swaps for environment projects from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) There are also debt-for-development swaps for sustainable production for small and medium-scale NGO/PO projects through the Swiss government, NGO-managed funding facilities for human resource development and micro-enterprise development from the Canadian International Development Agency and for integrated protected areas through the Global Environment Fund of theWorld Bank.

Negotiations are presently ongoing for the continuation of sustainable enterprise production and for people participation in governance for CIDA’s next country program for the Philippines. These programs have benefited millions of families in poor areas all over the country.

The impact is made possible by the vast scale of coalitions and alliances that have been established by NGOs and POs themselves. The biggest and most ambitious coalition of NGOs ever established is the Caucus of Development NGO Networks, or CODE-NGO, which was organized in 1991 by ten of the largest NGO networks in the country. Today, CODE-NGO counts as its members nine national networks and four resgional networks collectively representing more than three thousand NGOs and cooperatives all over the country.

The formation of CODE-NGO marks the development community’s desire as well as a demonstration of its capacity to police and promote professionalism in its own ranks through a code of conduct for develoepment NGOs. In its five years of existence, CODE-NGO has been an effective NGO mechanism for consensus-building on the key issues and for dialogue with and unified advocacy towards government. In the coming years, CODE-NGO intends to continue to scale up the impact of development NGOs in the country.

In APEC, CODE-NGO is claimingh triumph for having been able to make the government adopt sustananble development as the over-arching philosophy of the Philippine Individal Action Plan (IAP). Sustainable is considered as the best alternative to unbridled liberalization being pushed by the United States in APEC.

Inspite of these accomplishments, NGOs have barely scratched the surface of poverty in the country. The daunting task of arresting povertyand bringing about a progressive economy still rightfully belongs to government. However, with the experience and potent models that Philippine NGOs and POs have accumulated and the dynamic civil society that they have helped to create, they remain a vital source of energy in pursuing a sustainable form of development in the country.

Unfortunately the road ahead is paved with great difficulties. Even as the country moves to higher levels of economic prosperity, our experience has shown that such such transformation does not always ensure equitable distribution of benefits. Thus, we need to ensure that resources for social programs that aid the poor continue to increase together together with the improvement of our economy. Communities need to be continuously organized so they can actively participate in the mainstream of economic and political decision-making.

The gains by the NGOs in policy-making or in forums like the APEC must be followed up by vigilance. No battle is ever finished. Civil society must continue to fiscalize government so that it does not succumb to the pressuresof traditionalpolitics and indifference in the bureaucracy.

back to top                      post a comment

NOTES:

Subhead