Can NGOs achieve their destiny?

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)