NGO's: Who Do They Represent?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Brooklyn, New York, United States of America (Free-Press-Release.com) November 2, 2011 -- Democracy broken down into its simplest form is this: To govern with the consent of those being governed. I mention this because one of the key criticisms of NGO’s today is their lack of democracy, which to many creates a lack in legitimacy. This lack in democracy can been seen on two distinct levels.

The first type is representative. Most NGO’s, if not all, were not elected or chosen by a particular group or social class to represent their needs and ideologies. In fact it is pretty difficult to understand just how an organization made up of western, English speaking, highly educated affluent executives with high salaries and all the convenient amenities available to them can even begin to understand, and more importantly represent, the needs and issues of poor and impoverished people living thousands of miles across the globe who grew up with a completely different set of social, cultural and ethical guidelines.

This, according to a paper published by Rana Lehr-Lehnardt of Columbia Law School, raises some interesting questions about the representative nature of the NGO and whether it properly acts as a legitimate voice for the individuals in the societies they claim to represent. It also brings into question whether these individuals agree with the statements and mandates of the organization and whether the NGO actually has any way of knowing whether the citizens of the countries the NGO is trying to influence agrees with the NGO’s position on the issues.

If you look at the way most NGO’s are structured and from where they receive their funding you have to wonder just how much direct say, if any, the people they are representing have in the issues that supposedly should matter to them most.

In the January 2000 edition of the Economist, one author wrote, “many NGO’s, lacking any base in the local population and with their money coming from the outside, simply try to impose their ideas without debate.” The example given is that often NGO’s work to promote women’s or children’s interests as defined by western societies, winning funds easily but in turn creating social disruption on the ground. Of course there are benefits, but often some of these “rights” are not representative of the desires of the majority of the members in the affected society.

The other clear lack in democracy amongst NGO’s, according to Lehr-Lehnardt is internal. How many NGO’s have you heard of who actually vote on their leaders, policies and platforms? Very few follow any kind of democratically created constitution and therefore are even less likely to be accountable to their members.

You have to wonder then, that without a democratic process for the election of board members, consensus on projects and issues whether NGO’s, most of which are Western-oriented, act as true representatives of larger constituencies, or whether they simply serve as political platforms of the elite.

Either way you look at it, I think it is clear that the power and influence that NGO’s needs to be limited by some sort of international legal framework to provide for accountability. Failing to do so simply leaves the door wide open for NGO irresponsibility and abuse of power and influence.

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=lps_clacp
http://www.economist.com/node/276931

foreign policy     NGO criticism     NGO s