Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are major players in development aid today. Good governance is both a growing concept and concern in all institutions which is believed to be of major importance and should be applied at all levels of operation; be it strategic planning, accountability, administration and human resources. Knack and Keefer (2003) find that the quality of institutions is crucial to growth and development.

In order to better understand the importance and implementation of good governance in NGOs, it is a pre-requisite to acquaint oneself with the definitions of the two terms. Charnovitz (1997) posits that NGOs are groups of individuals organized for various reasons that engage human imagination and aspiration which are set up to advocate a particular cause or to carry out programs on the ground. Governance, on the other hand, is an inclusive term and involves formal institutions of decision-making. It can be regarded as constituting an aspect of good governance.  It may be referred to as an aspiration or ambition, which assumes that the process of governing meets certain standards, as explained in the World Bank’s policy research working paper on Governance Indicators (Kaufmann and Kraay, 2008). Kaufmann et al. (2000) defines governance as the traditions and institutions that determine how authority is exercised in a country.

According to the presentation on “Good Governance in NGOs” by Mr.Dana Chengan, this concept brings significant contribution to the promotion of trust in the organization, improvement in the quality of decision making, the ability of weathering a crisis and ensures financial and resources stability. It also helps in the enhancement of service delivery and communication within the organization.

Good governance can be implemented in the system of NGOs by being in line with the 8 principles of the latter; that is, participation, following the rule of law, accountability, transparency, responsiveness, consensus, stragtegic vision and, effectiveness and efficiency.

• Participation

All members should have a voice in decision-making that represent their interests. Such broad participation is built on freedom of association and speech, as well as capacities to participate constructively.

• Rule of Law

Legal frameworks should be fair and enforced impartially, particularly the laws on human rights.

• Transparency and Accountability

Transparency is built on the free flow of information. Processes, institutions and information are directly accessible to those concerned with them, and enough information is provided to understand and monitor them. NGOs should promote this concept especially when dissipating information about their decisions, decision making process, in their strategic planning and recruitment processes.

• Consensus Orientation

Good governance mediates differing interests to reach a broad consensus on what is in the best interests of the group and, where possible, on policies and procedures.

• Effectiveness and efficiency

Processes and the institution should produce results that meet needs while making the best use of resources.

• Strategic Vision

Leaders and the public have a broad and long-term perspective on good governance and human development, along with a sense of what is needed for such development. There is also an understanding of the historical, cultural and social complexities in which that perspective is grounded.

Simply put, the implementation of good governance in any institution, whether it is an international NGO or a national NGO one, can only be possible if these eight principles are adhered to. However, it is worth noting that there are both internal conflicts and external factors that may influence the correct procedures of implementing good governance in any institution.

NGOs, Non-governmental organisations are made up out of free will without having profit as an aim. It represents the voice of those who cannot be heard, in other words, it represents people who cannot identify ways to speak up their opinions on certain situations and bring about a change.

Good governance is an ideal where a myriad of qualities are needed: transparency, accountability, honesty and much more. Good governance should be a process where the majority of the population is engaged. The NGOs put forward good governance through civil society actions focusing on empowerment and involvement.

How to have more involvement of citizens which ultimately lead to democracy? A concept that may help to achieve democracy is respecting everyone’s opinion by reaching a consensus –consensus is the best solution as it respects each individual’s opinion.

Transparency is the action of sharing information openly. It is the sharing of information to all people who are concerned in various ways and special ways of deliberating information should be made such that illiterate people or handicapped people may have the information. The information put forward should be relevant, accurate and complete. Transparency is also considered pertinent for controlling corruption in public life.It will show to the government how  lack of transparency can lead to inefficiencies .

The NGOs coming with new laws or projects should act in an equitable manner which will make the society trust it more. This can be achieved by setting up of laws and by-laws; allow the society to participate in these discussions and allow them to have their say/opinion. A good society is one which ensures that all its members do not feel excluded, and therefore want to participate. This requires that all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to improve or maintain their well-being. Everyone should feel concerned irrespective of his or her position in the social strata.

Accountability has a great role to play in good governance. Accountability has many forms, including accurate reporting of financial data, the publication of annual reports. Who is accountable to whom? This question depends on whether decisions or actions are pronounced internally or externally within an organization. Generally, an organization or an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law. Accountability requires both transparency and the rule of law. It is to be noted that answerability comes along with accountability, whereby the citizens are able to demand that the state justifies its actions.

Last but not least, public sector actors should be held accountable. Both the private sector and civil society have a role as “watchdogs” to promote government accountability and as they monitor such issues, the organizations must share information with important stakeholders or the general public and also, engage government counterparts in constructive conversations.

George provided an insight about how good governance prevails in the governmental system in his country, Japan. A country and its people needs laws, regulations and acts to influence its citizens’ codes of conduct positively. However, George explained that good governance can be practiced out of good faith and education of the population. People need to acknowledge and abide by the established rules, not because of fear of the system, but by holding on to their beliefs. In this way, showing trust to their own self brings as much trust and confidence into their judicial, governmental systems and civil society. However, as much as this argument is morally sound, it is debatable as to how can one rely only on their good faith so as not to indulge into actions going against the rules of law; since good faith, education and rules & regulations can be argued to be interlinked.

The Honorable Mr. Osman Mohammed, parliamentary member of the Opposition party explained about the practice of good governance in Mauritius. Owing to a well established welfare state and a good judiciary system where laws, acts and regulations have been catered for; Mr. Mohammed showed strong confidence in the Mauritian governmental system by quoting the Mo Ibrahim Index and Freedom Index. He also explained that the Mauritian government adheres to its rules of law supported by a strong judicial system, has in place independent bodies to promote accountability and good governance principles. There is no doubt that the democratic government literature for a fair bit of time emphasized the need to develop and instill independent and robust institutions. Mauritius did very well at that level and created a host of institutions whose independence and autonomy were constitutionally guaranteed. However, it is inevitable to ask how efficient and effective these institutions in discharging their duties and responsibilities are. It is high time that we move away from governance as a number crunching and institutional creating exercise to one which is about real accountability to citizen. After all, state legitimacy and good governance do not depend only on regular elections but a functioning of institutions which articulate well with citizen engagement.

The intervention of Mr. R. Appayah was very stimulating in the sense that it touched the core issues that are actually crippling the Mauritian institutions. Mauritius is far from being the picture perfect example as evidenced by the successive high profile corruption related events as well as the growing patronage and cronyism causing many of the Mauritian brains to mitigate to greener pastures; clearly pointing that the country is currently undergoing bad governance where corruption cases are coming to surface and there is a lack of effective rules of law to remedy the situation. Moreover, the fact that there is a deliberate collusion between politicians, certain public servants and a section of the business world; it is crowding out the population who often has to pay a heavy price for the corruptive practices or in-competences of a small clique. It is of paramount importance to find an answer as to how to change the rhetoric around transparency and accountability into meaningful and tangible actions.

NGOs are accountable to their communities (stakeholders); good governance is the basic form of accountability; good governance has a formal structure, good governance involves the separation of governance and management, NGOs are mission-based organisations; NGOs promote the highest professional and ethical standards; NGOs exercise responsible resource management and mobilization; and NGOs are responsible to the communities they serve. The guidelines then provide practical advice on implementing these principles.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are legally constituted corporations created by natural or legal people that operate independently from any form of government. The term originated from the United Nations, and normally refers to organizations that are not a part of a government and are not conventional for-profit businesses.

Good governance refers to government agencies’ conduct in implementing innovative policies and programmes to increase the quality of public service with the ultimate aim of increasing economic growth. This paper investigates good governance in Indonesia, with a focus on its implementation by regional / local government. There is no single and exhaustive definition of “good governance,” nor is there a delimitation of its scope, that commands universal acceptance. The term is used with great flexibility; this is an advantage, but also a source of some difficulty at the operational level66. Very often the term “good governance” is connected to the public affairs and way to manage public resources. Governance is a decision making process and their way of implementation. It’s not only about making “correct” decisions, but about the best possible process for making those decisions. In practice good governance is used in many sectors and areas of activities and to describe interactions between different groups of society.

Good governance and human rights are mutually reinforcing. Human rights principles provide a set of values to guide the work of governments and other political and social actors. They also provide a set of performance standards against which these actors can be held accountable. On the other hand, without good governance, human rights cannot be respected and protected in a sustainable manner. The implementation of human rights relies on a conducive and enabling environment. This includes appropriate legal frameworks and institutions as well as political, managerial and administrative processes responsible for responding to the rights and needs of the population.

A non-governmental organisation should help in implementing a good governance strategy as it brings many benefit to the society. People are more likely to have confidence in their local government if decisions are made in a transparent and accountable way. This helps people feel that local government will act in the community’s overall interest, regardless of differing opinions.
It also encourages local governments to remember that they are acting on behalf of their community and helps them to understand the importance of having open and ethical processes which adhere to the law and stand up to scrutiny. Elected members and council officers will feel better about their involvement in local government when good governance is practised.

Councillors will be more confident that they are across the issues, that they can trust the advice they are given, that their views will be respected even if everyone doesn’t agree with them, and that the council chamber is a safe place for debate and decision making.

Good governance creates an environment where elected members and council officers ask themselves ‘what is the right thing to do?’ when making decisions. The most significant contribution of councillors to the planning process is when they establish the strategic framework in which decisions get made. Their participation in the development and review of municipal strategic statements, local planning policy frameworks and local other policies allows them to shape the vision for the municipality and how it will look in the future.

While speaking of good governance we also refer to the matter of electing non corrupted people and avoid a corrupted society. While giving much importance to good governance. The NGO should be able to handle the different roles allocated.

Non – Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are organizations that are neither a part of a government nor a conventional for-profit business. NGOs are set up by ordinary citizens and may be funded by governments, foundations, businesses, or private persons.  Good governance is very important in an NGO because the latter is accountable to the community.   Since they benefit directly or indirectly from public support, NGOs are expected to demonstrate a high degree of accountability to their surrounding community.  This community includes members, beneficiaries, donors, the government, and other stakeholders or constituencies. As such to good governance here becomes the steer that can guide NGOs towards social accountability.

The eight principles of good governance are : accountability, transparency, responsive,  equitable and inclusive, effective , efficient and participatory.  These eight principles are the base of good governance whereby any NGO who follow them shall not only perform better and at the same time be a better-managed organization but also get the trust of the different stakeholders.

According to the World Bank, Good governance has to have three aspects:

First, the form of political regime;

Second the process by which authority is exercised in the management of a country’s social and economic resources for development.

Third, the capacity of the government to design, formulate and implement policies and discharge functions.

Generally, all NGOs have a “basic document” as required by law, that is, the act of incorporation, statute, etc.  This document explicitly designs the name of the governing bodies, their roles and responsibilities within the organization.  It also states how an NGO function, i.e., the board and the distribution of decision making powers.  This is the governance structure of NGOs in Mauritius generally.  Now in order to bring in good governance, the whole structure has a crucial role to play.  Since the board members are the pillars of an NGO structure, they are the ones who are going to implement that aspect of good governance.

Firstly, we have a board which is the principle governing body and also takes decisions.  For a better governance the board members should proceed towards having collective decision making that will represent the interest of all stakeholders while still being focused on their mission.  In other words involve all the responsible parties in order to understand the needs of the organization.  These collective decision making processes have a practical benefit also.  The involvement of all members brings more breadth of perspective and depth thereby surpassing the abilities of a single leader.  This also brings up much transparency in the work and role of the board.

Secondly, when a board governs, it generally has staffs that manage.  The division of duties between board and staff often leaves a gap between them and affects the effectiveness of the whole process from decision making to implementing.  But for a better governance to be in action it is crucial that the board must involve and participate in the implementation task thus eliminating the gap that hinders the board from fully understanding the needs and requirements of the organization and thus become more responsive.  This also encourages all the parties involved to be more confident and the end result be better decision making.

Taking in account the impact that good governance, it is easy to understand that the latter is beneficial for all, be it the stakeholders, the society or the government.  Good governance can improve the transparency of NGOs, involve participation, be more responsive, responsible and be effective and efficient and have more social accountability.  This will generate trust of one and all.

Krishna Athal in the book “Ramrajya” states extremely important point: “often countries have a way somehow of twisting the principles into shapes that suit their own personal agendas instead of those of the nation”[1]. We all aware of extreme amount of money paid every year by developing countries. Not so many people aware about why does it happened. Cold war and the corrupt regimes that emerged during this time was a prefect opportunity to put the country on the hook by throwing it into debt. Corrupt regimes easily spend the money and run away, whereas many countries with its sovereignty were left in the struggling situation. First of all, the government that spend the money already far away, but the lawns need to be paid back. Secondly, citizens are here and they demand for better conditions, where any fluctuation of their will can flow away any new regime. That puts another, already new government in the same situation, where lawn is already just a problem of survivor. Since cold war, such situation happened in more than 50 countries, where almost 300 million people live only on less than one dollar a day. According to the World Bank, up to 2015 there are still 39 countries happened to be in the same situation. Since the situation has not been solved, there were many talks about external debt cancelation. World Bank and IMF described those countries as Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) and divided the countries above in three types:

• Those that already completed status of HIPC such as: Angola, Afghanistan, Benin, Plurinational State of Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Níger, Rwanda, São Tomé Príncipe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia.
• Those that in the decision point: Chad, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea.
• Those that in Pre-Decision Point: Eritrea, Somalia, Sudan.[2]

However referring to only the time of cold ward would be not correct. The author of the words mentioned above, Krishna Athal is a struggling representative of Youth United Voluntary Activity group in Mauritius. From the one hand, Mauritius is one of the most developed courtiers in Africa with relatively strong economy. From the second hand, we have an extremely difficult situation, when according to the data of Central Statistics Office of Mauritius, external debt of Mauritius doubled since 2010, from 200 MUR Million to almost 550 MUR Million.[3]

What should we do with this situation?

Pro.

Since 1980s Paris Club, World Bank, IMF and other official bilateral creditors mostly from developed countries tried to solve this situation. At the beginning in 1980s for the debt relief were proposed different concessional mechanisms. By 1995 Paris Club offered a mechanism of rescheduling of debt for low-income countries “Naples terms” when two-thirds of the eligible debt were rescheduled. However, the poverty-debt cycle still remained.

Another initiative was started already in 1996, named the original Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs), list of which was mentioned before. To be considered for such initiative, “countries must face an unsustainable debt burden which cannot be managed with traditional means”[4]. The initiative provides a debt relief on low-interest loans to cancel or reduce external debt repayments to sustainable levels, following extensive lobbying by NGOs and other bodies. That means, that countries can repay the debts in a timely fashion in the future but need to agree for some conditions instead.

Contra.

We can see that there is no such thing as a free lunch. In HIPCs initiative, by 1999 only four countries had received any debt relief. As an example of such program in East Africa, in May 2012 the IMF agreed to lend ten million dollars to help Republic of Djibouti “meet its debt and import payments”. In the response, the Djibouti government has “agreed to reform diesel fuel subsidies, freeze any hiring in the public sector, except for health and education and freeze public sector pay, except for the lowest salary band”. Above all mentioned Djibouti needed at the same time keep constant four percent of inflation.[5] Such maintenance of structural reforms or privatization for other countries in exchange of debt cancellation is common case. However conducting of such coordinal reforms and simultaneous debt payment is a very difficult task even for strong economies. In the end, Republic of Djibouti has not yet considered to be eligible for the HIPC initiative.

The cancellation of external debt without anything back is a difficult question even for United Nations. In July 2012 a United Nations report was introduced an indexed loan repayments program, where the interest rate connected to a country’s economic export growth. According to it, borrower country would repay more of their debts in the good times, and less during the hard times, what potentially don’t solve the problem but only postponed it.

At the same time debt relief raises concerns about excessive borrowing in the future, what is another problem for developing countries. It creates a huge doubt for IMF and World Bank to lend money for the future development.[6]

Pro.

Other policy that could be conducted by the country to reduce the debt is increase of inflation. Reduction in the nominal value of currency will reduce the value of debts and could increase the chance of debt relief.

On the other hand, another opportunity for debt cancellation could be found in help of other countries. Brazilian government in May 2013, announced to cancel or restructure almost 900 million dollars debt for African countries. Such policy will help expand Brazil’s economic connections with Africa in infrastructure, agriculture and social programs and at the same time rapid up the growth of trade and investment between regions.  In the program included 12 countries, in beneath which Tanzania, that owes Brazil 237 million dollars, along with oil-producing Republic of Congo and copper-rich Zambia.^[7] 

At the same time, after long negotiation with IMF, World Bank, African Development Bank and several Western lenders since 1999 followed by a catastrophic recession that ran for a decade until 2008, neighborhood country Zimbabwe finally reach its goal. According to CNBC Africa, Zimbabwe’s Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa proclaim that “Zimbabwe will have its external debt arrears cleared by April 2016”. If the country will achieve its goal in 2016 it will be an important prove that it is possible to clear external debt with its partial cancellation and other initiatives provided by external institutions.

Contra.

Another question is what would debt cancellation bring to the country. Does all these initiatives after cancelling external debt or governmental policy of inflation will really help the country and improve poverty and other issues? Simply speaking, will it all reach the poor people? On the other hand, what is the reason for relieved countries, don’t contract further debts, under the understanding that the future debts will also be forgiven? Possible corrupt regime of the country could use the investments and external initiatives in their private means. And here we come to the case of Mauritius. As the most important example we can see previously one of the most developed country in the world that under NGO’s policies and corrupted government led the country into the debt. Such policy not only makes the country more depended on global North, but brings unstable situation in the country that is at the moment not so globally reflected. The bubble of IT technology when country was full of money is disappeared and what would be the other future for the country, as not be depended on global NGO’s and their initiatives to struggle in the future poverty. From this perspectives external debt cancellation is not a possible solution.

Driving a conclusion, we see, that external debt and the burden of paying back the debt is an important problem in poor countries where funds have to be syphoned off basic social services to pay for external debt servicing. Depending on the country, policies provided by external institutions are helpful for one country and destructive for another. Some countries are more or less struggled to solve the problem of external debt, but in spite of all the affords of international community, the majority of HIPC countries are still in debt. At the same time not only HIPC countries are struggling from the debt, but previously developed countries as Mauritius are also in the very difficult situation, where simple external debt cancelation will not solve the problem that they face.

[1] Krishna Athal, “Ramrajya” p214

[2] Official Web Site of World Bank, External Debt – accessed December 5, 2015

[3] Central Statistics Office of Mauritius Web Site – accessed December 5, 2015

[4] Factsheet: Debt Relief Under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative – The IMF – accessed December 5, 2015

[5] Jubilee Debt Campaign Website – accessed December 5, 2015

[6] The World Bank “Global Development Finance” 2006, Washington DC, p.95

[7] News Paper Report, May 2013

NGO’s are non governmental organizations that represent the most forceful voices for ordinary people. They are the most strident advocates of diversity and participatory citizenry and come with strong proposals of change. The biggest advantages of NGO’s are; they are transparently managed and oriented to represent public interest They also promote community improvement and campaign for human rights, social justice and other billowing issues arising in the globalized world. For an NGO to function efficiently, it is important to have a substantial level of willingness from its volunteers who work assiduously without any material interest. NGOs should also adopt a proactive approach to their work and have a visionary and practical agenda.

Good governance in NGO’s is as important as it is in private and public sectors. Good governance in NGOs is the way strategies and measures are taken through the principles of integrity, transparency and accountability. The named board have a prime responsibility of proper functioning of every division of the organization. It is a matter of paramount importance that NGOs are in the parameters and guidelines of good governance and apply a high level of transparency and accountability to every task they deal with. If NGOs aim at promoting performance and accountability in the humanitarian system, they will primarily need to demonstrate these same principles in the management of their own coordination and self-regulation mechanisms. This greatly improves quality and accountability.
NGOs are not exempt to corruption. Corruption, includes nepotism, bribery and fraud and can lead to conflict thus undermining the work of NGOs and also leading to an amiss reputation. Corruption acts as one of the major barrier in the achievement of good governance in NGOs and it should thus be ensured that the principles adopted by the organizations are fully ethical and do not converge in any way to the orb of corruption.

NGO leaders should be able to apply the principles of good governance in regulating any process of their respective organizations. Their proposed agenda should be gripping enough so as to initiate a high level of volunteerism including many youngster who will work at a collective level and initiate their voice to become a permanent component in decision making.

There should be regular reports of any funds through accounting, budgeting and audit processes. Audit processes are carried out by social accounting and verification. This intense internal control of funds helps to manage the economic assets of an NGO and helps to build up a good financial system which is crucial for any organization. Auditing provides a major framework for good governance. Reports to stakeholders is a chief asset for effective and legitimate NGO assessment. Furthermore, participation facilitates the claim of product, which is essential to bring about a positive change. In a deeper meaning, ensuring a balanced participatory system in civil society creates trust and engagement of the stakeholders in the organization.

NGOs should in no way be related to any political parties, or else this inquest the basis of their inception. They should adopt an ethic of neutrality so as to promote standards and principles of the country. NGOs should note that indulging in any malpractices or nefarious works is highly detrimental to their reputation and undermines the trust and support of their stakeholders and as well as the public. They must regularly analyze any potential risk of corruption and alleviate these risk as well as implement productive mechanisms for strengthening their overall internal systems. NGOs also need to present legitimate accounts for their decisions and activities they are undertaking, this ignites a high level of transparency and compliance.

To promote an accountable and transparent humanitarian response, NGOs should be able to identify accountability gaps present at any level and assist to tackle the problem. Also, feedback and complaints mechanisms should be imperatively included as part of the coordination system. These will ensure that NGOs work efficiently under the a top-notch leadership of a dedicated cadre.

I fathom that NGOs are imperative to be of assistance to any government. However, we shouldn’t neglect the realities that come with and from NGOs. Most NGOs comes with terms and conditions, “the hand that feeds you, controls you” aspect is very much the equivalent in this era and century. So, just how effective are NGOs? Will they have the aptitude to be implemental tools for good governance without being bias? Is it possible for NGOs to implement good governance fairly, transparently and accordingly without pushing a hidden agenda? The answers to the above-mentioned are a paradox. It is an enigma of its own that needs proper dissection and or perusal, whilst taking cognizance of all the positive change NGOs are able to convey in ALL levels. Also, “Perception of Interpretation” shall be observed in my findings. The following are my thesis;

NGO – Non Governmental Organization

• According to Wikipedia, non-governmental organization (NGO) is any non-profit, voluntary citizens’ group which is organized on a local, national or international level. In other words, the organization should NOT be dedicated at making a profit.

Objectives of an NGO

• NGO – brings the balance, of rich and poor, ethical development, inclusion, counter social unfairness, voices of the vulnerable, watchdog of development.

Structures Representing for Social Development

• Government – Policy Making à Responsibility à Accountability
• NGO – Civil Societies àEthical Development àMake a positive change
• Private Sector – Business Development à Investments à Profit àReinforce Economy

According to Mr.Dana Chengan’s presentation on Good Governance in NGOs, the below is the “Impact of Good Governance in Youth Organisation and or NGOs (of which I agree) ;

• Promotes TRUST in the organisation and its
• Improves morale among staff and stakeholders.

• Enhances services to the public and stakeholders.
• Improves decision making and quality of these decisions
• Connects your organisation è Board/Members/Stakeholders
• Enhances the perception of the organisation among people and stakeholders.
• Improves the ability to weather a crisis.
• Improves financial and resources stability. ”  

The following mechanisms can be employed to ensure good governance;

The mechanisms that have emerged in recent times to ensure the good governance of NGOs working in Namibia can be attributed in part to the interactions and exchanges between international and national NGOs. While many national NGOs, whether at a national level, have arrangements such as a board of directors, there is still a significant gap between their adoption and their effectiveness. Here, it is useful to consider three mechanisms or arrangements identified by interviewees that are important aspects of accountability and transparency: a board of directors, strategic planning, and direct involvement by key stakeholders. By focusing on the importance of each mechanism, it is possible to understand the relations between national and international NGOs and the level of exchange between the two in creating more accountable systems.

Having a board of directors for an NGO is a general indication of its infrastructure for accountability, as the organization is accountable to a group of individuals appointed from beyond the organization. One of the greatest weaknesses of national NGOs is their governing system. Most National NGOs do not have a board of directors because of the difficulty in establishing one, and also in finding willing and experienced local people to sit on the board. For National NGOs that have established a board of directors, it is not uncommon for the head of the organization to preside over the board. The selection of the board members must come under scrutiny to determine the board’s impartiality and objectivity. It is appropriate to query the objectivity of a board in seeking to guarantee that the organization is free from any wrong-doing or unprofessional practices.

In conclusion, all that is left for NGOs is to operate on trust which is both respectable and perilous.

What does a NGO do? It represents the voice of those who cannot be heard, those who feel concerned about their situation in the society as well as in the country in general, those who wish to ‘warn’ the government about a situation amongst others. How do a NGO promote a nation to place their trust on it?

Good governance is a whole concept where we hear the terms transparency, accountability, honesty, politics, democracy… “Good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development”, Kofi Annan. Good governance’s objective should move away from the mainstream theories and include the people-the population needs to be incorporated in this process. The NGOs implement good governance through civil society actions focusing on empowerment. Good governance today plays a paramount role in the NGOs where money is involved, decision making processes, clear reporting lines, budget management and others. How is this implemented?

Some principles for good governance to be applied in a NGO are, inter-alia:

1. Participation

The type of empowerment and participation described in this partner agreement is different from just electoral participation. Participation is here used in order to obtain influence in the policies that affect them. By participating in the validation of development plans and budgeting, civil society may have a say or at least be able to express their views on the matters. One is that civil society may participate but after all it is the politicians who make the final decision. Even though civil society may have been consulted it does not necessarily imply that the final say appears to their advantage. Additionally, preparing a policy proposal every year does not equal the implementation or consideration of it. Another issue is the problem of reaching the very poor in society. People who have a hard time making a living are difficult to get to participate because political participation then is an extra aspect to deal with which does not make the highest priority. Participation of the civil society makes room for an informed and reflective section. Participation mechanisms can provide the opportunity for transparent feedback so local governments can hear from a broad diversity of people regularly. A related concept is consensus orientation –the process of establishing mutual understanding among diverse stakeholders about what is in the best interest of the whole community or society and the general direction for achieving that vision. Sustained good governance requires mediating different interests and establishing broad consensus in order for government and citizens to be able to take actions and the society to function without frequent conflict.

2. Transparency

Transparency means that decisions, and their enforcement, follow established rules and regulations.

It also means that all people who will be affected by such decisions have access to easily understandable information– in local languages and accessible to illiterate and blind/deaf community members. Transparency means sharing information and acting in an open manner. It promotes access to information. Information, however, must be timely, relevant, accurate and complete for it to be used effectively such as through community radio. Transparency is also considered essential for controlling corruption in public life. Through public financial accountability and transparency, CSO and government can learn to more efficiently allocate resources. A lack of transparency can lead to inefficiencies and hinder development.

Transparency = The act of sharing information openly, that is, a characteristic of accountability.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers– Article 19, UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.

Governance, from the vantage point of both government and the governed, has always depended on control of information and access to it. Fostering sound public judgment through informed dialogue is central to good governance. To achieve this, governments and citizens depend on information, data analysis and distribution. Information truly is power when resources and access are at stake. And peoples’ ability to control and shape information and channels of distribution are important aspects of that power.

3. Equity and inclusiveness

The NGO proposing any new laws or projects, should do so in an equitable manner which will eventually instill trust in the society. This can be done through proper setting up of laws and by-laws; involving the society to partake in these discussions and to allow them to have a say. A society’s wellbeing depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they have a stake in it, do not feel excluded from the mainstream, and therefore want to participate. This requires that all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to improve or maintain their well-being. Everyone should feel concerned irrespective of his or her position in the social strata.

4. Accountability

Accountability is a key requirement of good governance and constitutes the other side of participation. Accountability can take many forms, including accurate reporting of financial data, the publication of annual reports, and the responsible use of resources. One of the basic indicators of accountability within a group is its system of internal review and sharing findings as the NGO requires of beneficiaries. Who is accountable to whom varies depending on whether decisions or actions taken are internal or external to an organization or institution. In general, an organization or an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law. Government institutions, the private sector and civil society organizations must be accountable to the public and to their institutional stakeholders about what they have done, will do or failed to do. Accountability requires both transparency and the rule of law. Accountability involves reciprocal and full exchange of information. For example, in the case of CSOs, an organization has a responsibility to share information with the Principles: Good governance is accountable, participatory, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in consensus oriented decision-making.

Another aspect of civic participation is holding public sector actors accountable. Both the private sector and civil society have a role as “watchdogs” to promote government accountability. Watchdogs are organizations or networks that monitor specific issues, share information with key stakeholders or the general public and engage government counterparts in constructive dialogue.