Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) have, in recent years, been at the forefront in terms of development in the Global South. When looking at Africa, NGOs play a key role in providing healthcare and education in society as well as aiding the overall development of these countries, especially the development of their governance. Whilst it is difficult to contest that NGOs are of a prominent importance in the Global South, their usefulness in actually aiding the development of these countries has been up for debate. Such debate on the impact of NGOs is currently popular amongst a wide range of scholars including Jennifer N. Brass and Francesca Alduncin, with the former stating that we should not overstate the degree of change that NGOs bring (2012).
I have chosen to look at experiences from Kenya throughout this essay with a primary focus on the issue of governance and how NGOs have impacted this, both positive and negative. Overall, I believe that the strengths of NGOs and their work in Kenya outweigh the weaknesses. That being said, NGOs have a number of weaknesses which seem to stem from the fact that they are arguably out-of-touch from the citizens they are supposed to be representing and aiding (Peter, 2009). Some scholars would suggest that whilst these NGOs are aiding in the development of countries in Africa, they are almost continuing the work of their precursors: organisations that cooperated in Europe’s colonisation and control of Africa (Manji and O’Coill, 2018). And so, if these African countries are developing only to be constantly supported by foreign actors, are these foreign actors aiding their development or just steadily increasing their dependency? The issue with NGOs as development agencies is they undoubtedly do good in the countries in which they operate, but at the cost of said countries sovereignty.
This essay will be structured into three main sections, beginning with background information and analysis of the history of NGOs in Kenya and the issues that arose. I will then go on to analyse Kenya post-2002 and how relationships between NGOs and the Kenyan government developed and how this affected NGOs development work. The strengths and weaknesses of the matter will be analysed clearly throughout using a number of scholarly works, including some primary data collected by Brass.
In order to fully grasp the importance that NGOs hold in Kenya, it is key to look into the emergence of these organisations in the country and the difficulties they were presented with throughout the late 1980s and the early 1990s. The former President of Kenya, Daniel arap Moi, was openly sceptical regarding the presence of NGOs in Kenya and endeavoured to limit their influence on government throughout the time period aforementioned up until his loss of power in December 2002. His presidency has long been overshadowed by criticism and allegations of corruption as well as his treatment and perception of NGOs. Whilst Moi was seemingly content with NGOs aid in providing economic development assistance along with other assistance in matters such as poverty relief throughout the early to mid-1980s, there was a growing concern that they could begin to infringe on his authority. Not to mention, the NGOs were pushing citizens to put pressure on the government for further political democratisation. Moi and his administration began to try to find ways in which they could regulate and monitor the work of NGOs in Kenya, something which was seemingly fair as the majority of NGOs were foreign actors. This began during the late 1980s with NGOs being required to submit plans and budgets to the government and in 1989, legislation was created that enabled the government to actually deregister NGOs with an NGO Council being set up to keep check on the NGOs operating in the country. The government’s control over NGOs appeared to be secured in the early 1990s with a full NGO Act being passed in 1990 and further regulations implemented in 1992.
It is clear that as NGOs were increasingly pushing for further democratisation in the country, Moi became more intent on controlling the work and, in turn, the impact these NGOs were having. It is no surprise that Moi worked to undermine and supress the view on NGOs before Kenya’s first multi-party elections since its independence in December 1992. Moi has been described by many scholars as a dictator due to his authoritarian style of ruling, with this being evident in his enshrinement of his party, the Kenya African National Union (KANU), in the constitution as the sole political party of the nation in 1982 (Brown, 2001). Following the laws and regulations put in place during the late 1980s and early 1990s, hundreds of NGOs were deregistered. One such NGO that was deregistered was the Centre for Law and Research International (CLARION) which focuses on issues regarding constitutionalism, human rights and governance (CLARION, 2018). CLARION was officially registered in 1994 and its 1995 report on corruption in Kenya is what lead to its deregistration, though it was able to be reregistered the following year after enduring the lengthy appeals process combined with a large amount of local and international pressure. Such oppression of NGOs continued until Moi’s demise in 2002 when, in the same year, 304 NGOs were deregistered (Cammett and MacLean, 2014). The end of Moi’s administration can in itself be seen as a success of NGOs as organisations such as CLARION enabled the civil society in Kenya to become more aware of the corruption and autocratic rule in which they lived under. Peter (2009) states that ‘members of the civil society joined forces with the opposition to fight the government of former President Daniel arap Moi’.
The 2002 general election is seen by scholars as a turning point in the role of NGOs and their influence on government in Kenya. Murungi (2009) states that NGOs held the moral high ground in the run up to the election as they sought to establish a structure of good governance, but by doing so they had to give up the pretence of non-partisanship. The election saw the end of the long-standing dominance of KANU as Mwai Kibaki of the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) was elected as president. This was the first time an opposition candidate to KANU gained the presidency since its independence. Relations between NGOs and the new government changed rather quickly following the election with Brass viewing the change to be from hierarchical governance towards more collective governance (2012). Such improvements in relations was not just limited to service provision NGOs, but also those who work to delivery both service provision and governance activities. Some actors of NGOs became involved in the governing process, as well as civil society members who had previously been critical of Moi’s administration (Peter, 2009). It has been argued that Kibaki and his administration recognised that the benefits of positive relations between NGOs and the government vastly outweighed the political threat that they may hold (Brass, 2016). It could be suggested that Kibaki capitalised on the popularity of NGOs amongst citizens at the time and sought these relations in order to distance himself from his predecessor, Moi. The issue with NGOs working this closely with governments is that they have to ensure that the two do not appear to blend together as this could cause distrust amongst citizens. Such an issue occurred as citizens began to see NGOs and civil society members involvement with the government as a disappointment. The involvement of NGOs and civil society members became rather hard-line, supposedly acting more as masters of the people rather than seeking to serve the people. Peter (2009) argued that as a result of this, it was clear that ‘NGOs, CBOs and other people-based organisations should steer clear of direct politics and work as a check on state power’.
NGOs role in the Global South and specifically Africa, has been rightly disputed in recent years with many scholars claiming that NGOs are simply creating highly dependent countries rather than well-developed countries (Anderson, 2017). Some scholars would go further and suggest that NGOs are mimicking the role of European powers during colonial rule (Manji and O’Coill, 2018). Whilst I believe the latter argument is a bit overexaggerated, it is a fair argument. The Western view of NGOs, I believe, is that they aid countries in matters which they cannot aid themselves, but is it to some extent true that they are not given the opportunity to aid or assist themselves? It of course cannot be disputed that NGOs have greatly contributed to poverty relief and healthcare as well as other matters, however this constant aid undermines the ability of the ‘African people to emancipate themselves from economic, social and political oppression’ (Manji and O’Coill, 2018). The work and activism of NGOs should deter away from the participation of foreign actors and local educated elites and focus more on empowering local populations. If NGOs continue to merely represent the citizens of these countries rather than promote the participation of ordinary citizens, how will these countries ever be able to represent and aid themselves?