Civil society: Concept and role

The concept of civil society could perhaps be best understood from what it does or should do. Scholars in general see two important roles for civil society. First, to keep the state civil and non-intrusive. In our modern societal arrangements, only the state enjoys coercive powers and can legally exercise physical force over its citizens. Using this authority, a state can and often does usurp people's liberty. Scholars like Max Weber, Montesquieu, and James Madison warned us of such possibilities. Consequently, the principle of separation of powers was adopted to prevent the concentration of governmental authority. Under this arrangement, state powers are separated and assigned to three autonomous but interdependent branches, namely the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. This diffusion of state powers creates a system of checks and balances, which is intended to keep the government from becoming tyrannical.

In spite of these precautions, state powers may still be abused and misused for the benefits of individuals or the vested interest groups. Coteries enjoying the patronage of the people in power can also indulge in misdeeds. Examples of such abuses and misdeeds abound in history. The civil society as a distinct social force, composed of conscious and audacious citizens, has historically evolved to prevent such misdeeds by the state or state supported groups. Driven by own conscience and the desire to make a difference, members of the civil society boldly stand for the truth and the justice without fear of recrimination or victimisation.

In an authoritarian system or in a dictatorial democracy, the importance of civil society for its countervailing role can hardly be overemphasised. Its role can be that of the fourth branch of the state -- along with the executive, the legislature and the judiciary -- for holding the state to account. Civil society as an organised social force, with media included in it, can effectively play this role, enhancing the quality of governance by ensuring that the state and public/private institutions perform their responsibilities.

The role of civil society is not just to be at loggerhead with the state. Another important role for it is to promote and organise voluntary citizen action. The state alone cannot meet all the challenges people face, even if it is fully committed to their welfare. Organised citizen's groups can solve many problems locally, using local leadership, local initiatives and local resources. Civil society groups can be the catalysts, bringing people together at the local level to make it happen. In this role, members of civil society can work shoulder to shoulder with the state.

When people are organised, something magical happens -- a form of capital is created which is distinct from financial capital. This unique form of capital is called social capital. The source of social capital is interconnectedness and unity among people and their working together for a worthy common goal. History shows that societies, which enjoy more social harmony and generate more collective action, are relatively more well off. In countries like ours, where there is a great dearth of material resources, social capital can be an important substitute for financial capital. Civil society institutions can help create such social capital by catalysing citizen actions.

There are many reasons for the absence of a strong civil society movement in Bangladesh, one of which is our decadent political behaviour. An important cause for the decadence in our political process is a naked system of patronage. In our country, governmental facilities and favours are generally dispensed not based on a set of honest and objective criteria, but blindly to political henchmen without regard to fairness and justice. Such a spoil system, which is the worst form of corruption, creates an incentive for people, even for otherwise good people, to give up their neutrality and succumb to partisan positions. Consequently, many thoughtful individuals who should have remained non-partisan and, as members of civil society, speak up and speak out against injustices and misdeeds of the state, either become party to those deeds or remain silent about them. This state of affairs makes many people derisively refer to our so-called civil society as "evil society."

Voluntary organisations or NGOs are generally considered to be most important civil society institutions. But unfortunately in our country they have in general failed to play this role. One important reason for this failure is that most of our NGOs have over the years become contractors, implementing projects either for the government or for external donors. As implementing entities, they do not normally enjoy the freedom to assert their own priorities. Rather they have to play the games according to the rules set by the donors and implement many frivolous projects representing fads or pet ideas of the aid bureaucracy. Given this situation, with the drying up of donor money reflecting changes in their priorities, the priorities of the NGOs also change.

Thus, most donor-funded projects do not endure. However, the most damaging aspect of this donor-dictated system is that many of our NGOs have essentially surrendered to the wishes and dictates of the donors, giving up their sense of dignity.

Another reason for the failure of our NGOs as civil society institutions is that many of them, especially the big ones, have become corporate houses. This naturally makes them more concerned about their own business benefits rather than public interest. Consequently, NGOs often are unable to take bold and principled stands in the greater interests of the public at large. Even though they offer various services and even dispense charity to help the poor, they seldom fight for the legitimate rights of the people or mobilise disadvantaged groups to resist the misdeeds of the authorities or of the vested interest groups. The service delivery approach the NGOs use, it is often argued, makes poverty more tolerable. It is no wonder then that we have been able to only alleviate the poverty of some people, but not eradicate it from our land in spite of much efforts and spending of huge sums of money over the years.

Some of our NGOs have also become partisans. They overtly or covertly promote and protect the interest of specific political groups. As a result, they have lost their neutrality and are unable to play an effective watchdog role to protect the interests of the public.

While there is a great dearth of civil society organisations in our country, the Lathi-Bashi Samity of Natore has been an inspiring exception. It was organised in the backdrop of the state's failure to provide physical security to the people of Natore, especially to its business community. It was a voluntary initiative of the people. The lifeblood of this initiative was the unity of the sufferers against evil elements, not the money. It was not a project-based, money centered NGO initiative -- rather a truly civil society movement to combat social ills.

In October 2002, I had the privilege of participating in the third anniversary celebration of the Lathi-Bashi Samity along with Justice Habibur Rahman, Professor Muzaffer Ahmed, Professor Abdullah Abu Sayeed, The Daily Prothom Alo's editor Motiur Rahman and the film director Tarek Masud. During that visit I saw how this organisation not only asserted a united front against the daunting challenges of hooliganism, it also charted a new path for our socio-economic uplift. This new path involved awakening and mobilising people to create a social movement rather than implementing projects using large sums of donor funds. Social capital has been the basis of this initiative.

We know that most of the challenges people face are local and they must also be solved locally. The people facing them must be the key to their solutions. The Lathi-Bashi Samity not only organised and united the people in a lawful and non-violent manner to redress the challenge of toll collection, it also began to take initiatives to address other socio-economic problems like the subjugation of women and income generation. It goes without saying that the more such citizen initiatives are fomented around the country, the faster we will be able to redress many of our socio-economic problems and move forward as a nation. Nevertheless, the activities of the Lathi-Bashi Samity were abruptly stopped by the government a few weeks ago.

The Lathi-Bashi Samity is a legally registered organisation under the Directorate of Social Services. There are clear, mandatory procedures laid out by the registration authority for stopping the activities of registered organisations. However, according to newspaper reports, the activities of the Lathi-Bashi Samity were halted with administrative edicts, the legality and wisdom of which have already been questioned by many.

A mistake was made in stopping the activities of the Lathi-Bashi Samity and disbanding its central committee. Fortunately, efforts are now afoot to redress this mistake and reorganise it. We sincerely hope that another mistake will not be made in the process of reorganisation. According to the established rules, the authority to elect the executive committee of Lathi-Bashi Samity belongs to its general members. Any effort to dictate this election from the outside will not only be against the rules, but may also destroy the path breaking work the organisation has already initiated. Let the relevant authorities allow the general members of the Lathi-Bashi Samity to elect its own leaders and not interfere in the process.

Badiul Alam Majumdar, Ph.D. is Global Vice President and Country Director, The Hunger Project-Bangladesh.