Can NGOs achieve their destiny?

JAKARTA (JP): Achmad Baskara, 29, an employee of a Jakartan public relation consultancy, channels his socio-political concerns through two NGOs, which he and friends finance themselves. One NGO is named "Indonesia of the year 2000", a study group, he boasts, aimed to prepare Indonesia for democracy after Soeharto's presidency.

He was a student demonstrator, an activist in a youth political organization called GMNI, but left because "it was already co-opted by the government".

"The NGO is only a means. Once it is co-opted by the government, I'll leave it for another means to channel my idealism," he said.

The future of Indonesian NGOs? What a question! For several decades they have influenced the Indonesian economic, cultural and socio-political life and lured many youngsters -- many of whom are the brightest and the most concerned about disadvantaged people in the development process -- into agents of change. They have also bewildered the government.

To some people, the youths are heroes reminiscent of the founding fathers who at the same tender age were prepared to risk their lives for Indonesian independence. Others dismiss them as suppliers of the philanthropy and political interests of westerners.

Sociologist Kastorius Sinaga states in his newly published book, NGOs in Indonesia, the growth of NGOs during the New Order era is a result of the failure of the state and market in handling poverty, human rights, the ecology and gender equality. This is coupled by the growing belief in western donor countries of the ability of NGOs to cope with these issues.

During the New Order era, he says, the military, bureaucracy and business sectors colluded in amassing wealth for themselves. Development is oriented on GNP and economic growth, while the public are depoliticized in order to create stability -- a factor seen as the prerequisite for development. As a result, the gap between the poor and rich widens, leaving the poor no power to demand their rights.

Former activists and leaders led NGOs into the fray with the mission to empower the economic and political poor in the 1970s. By the 1980s, NGOs were flourishing. Today, there are an estimated 11,000 of them, most unrecorded by the government. All have confrontational names in line with their spirited aims. The groups have memberships of between two and hundreds. Unclear of their legal definition, the public and journalists simply define a NGO as any group founded by the public to address issues neglected by the state and the economic situation.

What matters surely most to all NGOs is money, with which they start and continue their activities. The resources come from foreign donor agencies (given either for philanthropic or political reasons), individual donations, membership dues, economic activities, and government subsidies. Kastorius' study of 22 Indonesian NGOs found that the majority get money from foreign donor countries, while other sources, like individual donations, are the main source of initial capital.

"Businesses here are reluctant to provide funds for the NGOs because there is no incentive from the government like in the western countries. There, donations to NGOs are rewarded with tax reductions," explained Kastorius.

The western pool of resources is reportedly easy to tap and abuse. The system for checking projects by donor agencies is weak, he said. They trust the Indonesian representatives who run the NGOs, in many cases completely relying on their professionalism in making proposals. This provides ample room for certain NGOs, among others, to obtain "double financing" by submitting one proposal to several donor agencies. Since donor agencies don't usually communicate with each other they aren't aware of the cheat.

Said Dhiane, a 24-year-old member of an NGO, commented "Some people's view that NGOs sell the country's poverty abroad is in some cases true. I have seen some people do it and the donation ended up in their pockets."

However financial backing by western countries remains uncertain because donors can drop their Indonesian recipients anytime they wish. Therefore some NGOs early on began to seriously think about ways to survive on their own. Some have managed by starting businesses and cooperating with the government, from which they hope to get projects. The NGOs' business interests focus on their traditional target groups -- the poor and the disadvantaged.

This phenomenon is greeted with some cynicism.

"What we are seeing now is the birth of a new industry -- the social development industry. In the western countries, the business community sets up the non-profit making NGOs. Here, in contrast, NGOs set up profit making companies," commented an observer who asked for anonymity.

Until recently the government was antipathetic towards NGOs, overlooking the fact that many development oriented NGOs were willing to cooperate with it to eliminate poverty. Dr. Adi Sasongko, chairman of the Kusuma Buana Foundation, an NGO dealing with community-based health projects, says things are changing.

"The government is now starting to embrace NGOs to become its partner, involving them in various joint projects as well as in policy making. It's a good start," he said.

The advocacy oriented NGOs, which make up about 10 percent of the total, are still beyond the governments reach, according to Kastorius. These groups trouble the government by their protests over injustices and their campaigns for democracy, human rights and labor rights. In the past, the government attempted to silence them with legalities and threats of imprisonment. Today it has a new tactic -- winning-over enemies as shown by the formation of the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), which has been able to somewhat eclipse the Legal Aid Foundation's monopoly of the human rights issue.

"The advocacy groups that will survive in the future are those involved in the issues of labor rights and gender. The government will pay too much if it tries to win these issues too," said Kastorius.

Many still believe in NGOs. Among them is Ben Fisher, head of the Environment and Social Impact Unit of the World Bank in Indonesia. He said,"(The World Bank) emphasizes the importance of community participation in development. This includes the participation of the private sector. And it includes participation by the public itself as individuals and as members of groups concerned with development."

But what will happen in the future? Will Achmad's fear that the government will co-opt the NGOs come true? If so, where will Achmad and his ilk go to channel their concerns? (jsk/als/raw)