By Zofeen Ebrahim
KARACHI, Mar 1 2007 (IPS)

Non-government organisations (NGOs) are bristling at a government proposal to impose a ‘code of conduct’ on them that will put their activities under close scrutiny and, if found wanting, allow their funds to be frozen.

Rejecting the proposal, NGOs allege that the code originally set to kick in this month is ”politically motivated,” has “malafide intentions” and is possibly a precursor to a new bill to curtail the freedom of NGOs.

‘’While we agree wholeheartedly with the need for transparency and accountability in government and non-government agencies, we believe that this new code is not required since regulatory laws already exist,” said a statement issued by a group of NGOs.

“Our intentions are honest, then why have they staged this war of words?” asked a bewildered official from the ministry of social welfare and special education which has been tasked with formulating the code.

In Pakistan ‘civil society’ is an umbrella term for a range of non-state citizens’ organisations and initiatives, networks and alliances. Included are political parties, governmental organisations, trade unions, philanthropies, academia, pressure groups, village councils and faith-based organisations.

Since the early 1990s, Pakistan has seen the growth of a vibrant NGO sector. Of the 100,000 big and small voluntary organisations that come under the ambit of civil society, barely 44,000 are actually registered (with one of the five regulating bodies). Not all are actively working for the larger public good or are above board. Quite a few have questionable transparency and accountability, some have weak governance and others are just family-run outfits. Some 70 percent are urban-based and do not represent the 65 percent of the population that lives in rural areas.

While successive governments have been supportive of the non-profit sector at the policy level, the strained relations are, for a large part, due to the state’s hostility towards organisations for engaging in social or political advocacy. The government prefers to see them confined to areas like welfare and service.

“It seems the code is going to become a supra law, as it goes beyond the provisions of the prevailing laws,” Shahnaz Wazir Ali, executive director of the Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy (PCP), said.

In 2001, the PCP had engaged in a year-long exercise with NGOs and the state to review the regulatory framework under which the NGO sector operates. It resulted in the draft of a new law, which has remains in cold storage..

Despite the PCP’s extensive experience, the ministry did not see fit to invite the commission for consultations in formulating the code.

“It’s not going to turn into a bill or an act. Their fears are misplaced. And this is not even the final document. We are open to changes and have called upon the NGOs to whet and review it,” said another official from the ministry.

‘’The present move (by the government) cannot be faulted in principle. What the motivations are is a moot point,” said Kaiser Bengali, a noted economist, who was, till recently, heading a policy research institution.

But Wazir Ali does not see it that way. “A code is usually developed by the (concerned) sector, is voluntary in nature and therefore needs a lot of consensus building.”

Her other contention is that the consultative process was “not inclusive enough” and thus lacked “full ownership” of the sector. ‘’The largest coalition of NGOs, the Pakistan NGO Forum (PNF) was not consulted.”

Federal minister for social welfare and special education, Zobaida Jalal, denied these charges. “We had invited around 700 NGOs to these meetings which were held all across Pakistan; 400 of those who gave their input were members of the PNF.”

With a PNF code already in place, Wazir Ali questioned the need for a parallel one while Harris Khalique, chief executive of Strengthening Participatory Organisation (SPO), felt that when regulatory laws for NGOs exist, the government should work towards improving their enforcement rather than creating more regulations.

The minister’s response was that there were a number of reasons for the new code. “Firstly the PNF’s code is for NGOs and by NGOs. The new code proposed by the ministry is not only for NGOs but for the government as well. Both are treated on equal footing with obligations on the part of both. Secondly, it is more flexible and inclusive. It is going to have bigger participation and it is to be formulated keeping in mind the capacities of NGOs – from the smallest to the biggest. It is not going to be an exclusive club, it is open for all.”

Khalique said the very fact that the code was drafted in the English language and circulated solely over Internet already made it exclusive. The vast majority of rural NGOs have neither access to electricity let alone computers, he pointed out.

As for the ministry’s claim that the code is “indigenous and tailored to the local needs,” Khalique said : “How can it be indigenous? It was prepared by the Charity Commission for England and Wales.”

Khalique and Wazir Ali thought the document confusing and pointed to ambiguities regarding enforcement. “If the current arrangement of the government cannot enforce the prevailing laws, what mechanisms will enforce this code? And if it is an enforceable code; it loses its voluntary character.”

“It is not a law or a tool of coercion and has no legal binding, so the question of any action against those who reject it does not arise,” said Jalal.

Many in the NGO sector fear that the community organisations will suffer, like the 2,000 or so that SPO partners with. “It will hit our rural partners, vulnerable women organisations and small community-based organisations.”

One cause for alarm is a section in the code that would allow regulators to freeze assets.

For now, the ministry has put up the document for public debate. So far, a web poll to gauge the code’s popularity has shown an overwhelming number of people accepting the code and only a few rejecting it.

Excerpt: