Dealing with problematic NGOs

By T. Mulya Lubis

Controversy has lately arisen concerning the role which non- governmental organizations (NGOs) are supposed to play in Indonesia. In the following article, T. Mulya Lubis, chairman of the Center for Human Rights Studies, takes a look at the issue.

JAKARTA (JP): Coordinating Minister for Political Affairs and Security Soesilo Soedarman has told the press that there are 32 problem NGOs in Indonesia. The number is small compared to the total number of NGOs which, according to the minister, reaches some 8,000.

NGOs have been accused of dabbling too deeply into practical politics, with certain objectives in view. It has also been quoted that many among them have received foreign aid without the government's permission. In this context, names such as the Foundation of the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute, Indonesian Forum for Environment, the Indonesian Prosperous Labor Union, the New Masyumi and the new Indonesian Nationalist Party have been mentioned.

Although the problem NGOs are linked with their political activities, the matter has given rise to confusion and apprehension. The problem NGOs are made to seem inferior to corruptors and manipulators, who abuse their authority. This accusation is not just, and has violated the principle of assumption of innocence because it has become a political verdict which will kill the problem NGOs. What have they actually done wrong?

The government should be more open and explain that the empowerment of the community is not allowed. Or, it should clearly say that "freedom to associate and to assemble and to state one's opinion orally or in writing", which is actually guaranteed by Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution, cannot be implemented. If somebody desires to establish an NGO, the scope of activities should not involve politics. This scope of activities is the monopoly of the government and its officials. Also, NGOs are not permitted to receive foreign aid, except with the government's approval. Those allowed to receive foreign aid are only the government and private businessmen, although the amount of aid and offshore loans has become a heavy burden on us, pushing our debt service ratio to over 30 percent.

The problem is, how far does foreign aid go to reach the people? It is said that the percentage of foreign aid failing to reach its destination is staggering. Foreign aid channeled to our NGOs is very small compared to the aid given to the government and the private sector.

Undeniably, since the presence of NGOs in the early 1970s, we have seen a growing awareness among our people with regard to law, politics and social matters. The voices demanding change and improvement in the economic, political and legal systems, heard clearly in various media, came from NGOs and workers in association with NGOs, not from the political parties and the functional group Golkar. Demands on democratization, human rights, rule of law, gender justice and ecology salvation came predominantly from NGOs. Everybody knows that the work of NGOs often has political implications, such as the defense of dislodged people, victims of pollution, victims of layoffs, etc. Theirs is not the work of practical politicians. It does not stand to reason to draw a clear-cut line between politics and law, or politics and economics.

Legally speaking, the government's statement on the problem NGOs can be categorized as an infraction of the principle of the due process of law, because these NGOs have been sentenced without their exercising the right to defend themselves. In the constitutional perspective, the verdict on the problem NGOs is already an attack on or at least a negation of the constitutional right to associate. Furthermore, the government has violated the principle of self-governing organizations that is regulated in each organization, including many NGOs, which legally take the form of foundations. So, to include foundations in the category of mass organizations and make them subject to Law No. 8/1985 on mass organizations is a big error. There are laws on foundations, and as long as there is no change in them, the government, which should also adhere to the law, is not allowed to violate the law. Everywhere, the government is also a subject of the law and must respect the law. Article No. 1 of Law No. 8/1985 seems to include all organizations outside political parties, including Golkar, limited liability companies, state-owned companies and cooperatives. But if the contents of said article are perused accurately, there is doubt on the inclusion of foundations in the scope of Law No. 8/1985, particularly if one reads the explanation which clearly excludes "cooperatives, limited liability companies, etc," because these are subject to their own legal regime.

Apparently, since the implementation of Law No. 8/1985, the government realized this and therefore has shown restraint in investigating the NGOs which are not mass organizations and are mostly foundations. So, although Law No. 8/1985 entitles the government to freeze and discharge mass organization board members, because NGOs are difficult to categorize as mass organizations, repressive measures cannot be taken. Our question now is: Why has the government taken a forceful stance and used muscle instead of reason?

It is hard to deny that the government's accusation against problem NGOs is viewed as the arrogance of power, which is distrusting of the critical voices of the NGOs. The NGOs have neither political power, nor firearms, nor abundant funds. These NGOs seem to be effective because they work at the grass roots level, express the voice of the heart, and appeal to a democratic spirit for renewal. The NGOs' stance is clearly not in favor of a status quo. But these NGOs are not radical rebels who could go underground. It is not wrong to say that the NGOs are critical partners of the government. There is a legal place in our socio- political order for the role of NGOs, a very historical place because basically, this country also started from NGOs like Boedi Oetomo, Serikat Dagang Islam, etc.

It would be wise for the government to recognize that the NGOs have an important share in the growth of this nation, and this role is not less important than that of the government, political parties and the functional group Golkar. Basically, the NGOs are children of this country, part of the nation's pluralistic society.

The writer is chairman of the Manila-based Regional Council of Human Rights in Asia.