ESCAP Study Surveys Registration of NGOs

On the other hand, a system of registration is potentially advantageous for all concerned - Government, the NGOs themselves and the users of NGO services. The purpose of the study carried out by ESCAP was to examine the extent to which registration can enhance the development process; or whether indeed it has the potential of having an adverse effect on NGOs contributing to development, either directly or by exerting a negative impact on Government-NGO relations.

It does not always seem clear to governments what registration should be seeking to achieve. Some of that lack of clarity is the result of an inability to understand fully the nature and roles of NGOs; and some of it relates to an inability to envision an environment where the government and NGO sectors are working collaboratively. Moreover, there is little evidence that in most countries careful thought has been given to constructing a model around government and NGO sector collaboration, with NGO coordinating bodies, NGO-Government consultative bodies, NGO registration and financial regulations all constituting essential elements of such a model.

One conclusion of the study is that registration of NGOs can maximize their potential to contribute to the enhancement of the people's well-being. In achieving that aim, registration operates as a form of control - in a positive sense. Moreover, it can operate to strengthen the sector by channelling to the NGOs expertise, resources, the opportunities for collaborative work and so on; but that process may be manageable only through effective NGO coordinating bodies. On the other hand, registration can easily reflect a desire on the part of government to restrain and constrain NGOs, rather than to enhance them. When it is used in this way the purposes of development are inevitably and unnecessarily circumscribed.

Registration will not be a beneficial arrangement unless Government-NGO relations are relatively harmonious. Moreover, this harmony must exist at the national level. Both Government and NGOs often appear apprehensive, if not frightened, by what the other might become or do. In that environment, any specific action is likely to be misinterpreted, so that normal sector operations on either side can aggravate the situation. For example, the offer by government of grants may be seen as bribes, of contracts may be seen as cooptation, and of registration as a desire to restrict operations. The best way to overcome this common situation would seem to be to involve the two sectors fully at the national level in planning and strategy development. It is to be hoped that involving the two sectors collaboratively in pursuing common agreed objectives will result in a high level of understanding and trust between them.

The biggest barrier to harmonious government-NGO relations is when either side endorses a political or ideological orientation which presents the other sector as inherently a danger to society. We can see some examples of this situation around the region. The focus must move away from the pursuit of ideology or party politics to focus on meeting needs collaboratively and building better societies.

Registration of NGOs is perhaps as important as the democratic basis of government. Both registration and democracy reflect accountability to the public - the people. Neither government nor NGOs should assert the right to act without due processes of reporting back to the people as their constituency, and being fully open to being influenced by the people in the spirit of people's participation in development. For NGOs, this process of accountability requires registration and is, in some countries, facilitated by the existence of effective NGO Coordination Bodies. These can, and often will be an essential link between the people, and the myriad of NGOs which exist in the region.

SEE OUR LIST OF HRD PUBLICATIONS FOR ORDERING INFORMATION