Before you travel to the WSSD Civil Society Global Forum, decide whether it is t
Eddie Cottle | 25.03.2002 15:00
There are many activists from all around the world who are planning to travel to Johannesburg South Africa later this year to attend the World Summit on Sustainable Development. A group of First Nations, anti-privatisation and anti-globalisation movements have broken away from the Civil Society forum and will be holding our own conference. The group fears that the civil society forum has been set up to rubber stamp structural adjustment policies for Africa.
World Summit Civil Society Global Forum!
Over the past few months a perception has been created that problems around management and representation of South African civil society in the world summit process is at the center of intra-civil society conflict. This is not so. Rather, a political struggle has emerged over how civil society must prepare and organise for the World Summit Civil Society Global Forum!
Background
In August 2002 hundreds of governments, mass-based organisations and non-governmental organisations will gather in Johannesburg at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). The main purpose of this summit is to review progress on the environment and development since the previous summit the Brazilian City of Rio de Janeiro. The Rural Development Services Network (RDSN) believes that the World Summit Civil Society Global Forum is going to be one of the most significant events to unite, mass-based women, youth and religious organisation, NGO’s and urban and rural social movements against global oppression and expliotation.
Throughout the 1990’s significant anti-globalisation movements have emerged in most regions of the world to challenge the rule of imperialist financial houses and neo-liberal policies in particular. From the Zapatistas in 1994 who stood against the dictatorship of the free market to the mass demonstrations of trade unions, community organisation, environmentalists, peasants and farmer organisations, students and feminists in Seattle, Washington, Melbourne, Prague, Nice and Genoa. In every continent mass organizations have blocked highways, battled multinational corporations, taken over parliaments and have embarked upon land invasions such as the 500 000 member strong Rural Landless Workers Movement (MST) of Brazil who resettled 200 000 families. The struggles in the regions of the world are a reflection and a response to the growing inequality and impoverishment of the majority of the people and the enrichment of the few. The Civil Society Global Forum in Johannesburg is therefore central to bringing together the collective experience of the worlds progressive and revolutionary social forces in an attempt to reverse the continued degradation of the planets ecosystem and reversing the growing sea of poverty and unemployment.
The Civil Society Indaba is formed!
When RDSN started a process of consultation within South African civil society there was no blueprint of how we were supposed to be organised. A series of consultations started in March including two sets of provincial meetings in all of our countries nine provinces. The CS Indaba was formerly launched in September 2001 and was the mouthpiece of South African civil society. By December 2002 the CS Indaba had adopted a model managed to bring together organisation of women, youth, faith, NGO’s, communities urban, communities rural, labour, informal economic sector, People with Disability and First People as major groups. We had also, decided to have provinces represented as they provided the link to communities and their issues and struggles. In total the CS Indaba provided representation for 10 major groups and all 9 provinces in the country.
Our model for the civil society process was based upon an the following principles adopted:
1. The Indaba must follow a mass based approach
2. A mass based approach applies to alliances as well
3. Our first allies are in Africa and in the South
4. The Indaba must encourage a diversity of voices
5. Government should be engaged but should do so with caution
6. It Indaba must operate on the basis of accountability and democracy
The principles above were codified in our “Call to Action” platform document which provided our political understanding of the failures of Rio and a vision of struggle. That we had to prepare and provide the basis of mass mobilisation, nationally, in Africa, the South and the North. In short, we were to prepare a militant and united programe for the Civil Society Global Forum.
The process to forming the CS Indaba was an important political milestone in South Africa’s post-apartheid history. For the first time a conscious effort had been made to form an alliance of civil society organisation of all kinds on a common political platform. Herein lie the danger as seen by government and it allied partners.
The role of the Government
In 1996 the South African government implemented a neo-liberal macro-economic policy called, Growth, Employment and Redistribution Strategy (GEAR). Like all other neo-liberal policies worldwide, the government prepared to privatise social services and reduce taxes for the rich. The consequences in SA have been extremely harsh. South Africa is now the country with the highest rate of income inequality between the poor and the rich and has overtaken Brazil. Over 1 million workers have lost their jobs and 10 times more people have died due to cholera in the past 19 months than the preceding 20 years! The government is also, resisting the provision of antri-viral drugs to save the lives of thousands of unborn, children, women and men who are HIV positive.
On the broader political landscape, the government is also planning to launch its New Economic Plan for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), the continental version of GEAR! The ANC/SACP/COSATU Alliance is to “…develop a common vision on NEPAD before the African Union Summit in July.” It is the agenda of NEPAD that is to be launched in August as Africa’s plan for sustainable development! At the African Civil Society Forum in Nairobi, Kenya on 15-16 October 2001, noted that the plan, “…did not emerge out of a process of consultation that involved all aspects of civil society. This goes against a culture and practice of participatory democracy.” The meeting also, noted that the plan contains “…all the aspects of structural adjustment programmes imposed by the Bretton Woods institutions on the continent.” An independent and vibrant civil society, which has recently adopted “A Call to Action” and an African Civil Society Forum who regards NEPAD as an obstacle to sustainable development, does not bode well for the objectives of government.
The destabilization and dissolution of the CS Indaba
The achievements of the CS Indaba while limited have on all counts have had enormous political impact on the process in preparation for the CS Global Forum.
COSATU and SANCO staged a walkout on 13 December 2001. The COSATU-led fight against the CS Indaba accusing it of not being representative and having serious management problems was merely a mask for a deeper political difference on how the Global Forum should be organised and what political positions it must take.
COSATU & SANCO objected to:
§ The representation of First People as a major group
§ The representation of provinces and their voting rights
§ The fact that black business was not represented
§ The definition of a community urban major group to mean the same as “civic” major group
§ That the management committee was not representative of all major groups
While, a mediation process was agreed to, COSATU in a dishonorable manner led a process to setting up an alternative to the CS Indaba called the Civil Society Multi-stakeholder Forum. What is not surprising is that this forum is less representative than the former CS Indaba and has only 7 major groups and has totally excluded provincial representation. Key major groups such as communities urban, communities rural and First People have been excluded! The communities urban and rural comprise of the emerging social movements that have been struggling against privatisation and the lack of land reform in South Africa.
Indeed, after all the attacks by government in the form of privatisation, COSATU had yet again suspended its anti-privatisation strike indefinitely. COSATU’s president, Willie Madisha has also stated that, “The interactions that we’ve had with the ANC in the (form of) bilateral meetings in particular, have actually helped us come closer together.”
So, we see that it is not accidental that when the walkout happened COSATU and SANCO declared that the problem with the CS Indaba is that it gives too much power to ‘anti-government NGO’s.” A similar picture emerged at the World Conference on Racism (WCAR) in Durban when COSATU and its allied partners refused to participate in a civil society march protesting at the lack of progress in transformation concerning issues of racial inequality. Instead, the ANC/SACP/COSATU Alliance had a pro-government march. The logic of the closeness between COSATU and the ANC means that mass struggle and the development of a critical perspective around NEPAD must be compromised.
As the CS Indaba had developed a “Call to Action” as its platform towards the Global Forum, this was essentially in political conflict with the COSATU-led bloc who was pulling in a direction which was more comfortable with the South African government. After a series of political maneuvers, with the help of certain SANGOCO leaders, they had managed to stop logistical preparations and the funding of the CS Indaba, thereby, rendering it ineffective and demoralizing the activist layer.
The next logical step in the evolution of the COSATU-led bloc was the Memorandum of Understanding between the government secretariat called the Johannesburg World Summit Company (JOWSCO). This new forum led by COSATU has given the organisation of the Civil Society Global Forum over to the government secretariat on a silver platter. The handing over to the government secretariat has effectively also, dissolved the civil society secretariat functions. The government secretariat is now tasked to:
1. Manage all the accreditation of all delegates to the Civil Society Global Forum
2. Install information kiosks at the Global Forum venue
3. Jointly manage a media centre at the Global Forum
4. Assist in the management of the exhibition, cultural and other events taking place. The opening and closing ceremonies will meet the needs of both parties.
The implications of this new agreement with government means that government will have a direct say over which civil society organisations get accredited; that civil society has provided the government National Intelligence a legitimate base from which to work; that our information becomes state controlled and that our “independent” actions become limited to a government organised Global Forum.
The above agreement with the South African government could only have been made with the dissolution of the CS Indaba whose militant platform was in contradiction to the COSATU-led bloc. In particular, COSATU had to marginalise the community urban and community rural social movements who represented an independent political force. A repeat of the kind of action in the city of Durban was not desirable.
Furthermore, the First People represented an embarrassment to the South African government who as a black government has totally neglected the burning land questions facing this major group.
The Rural Development Services Network (RDSN) after 13 months of having provided the legal and fiduciary responsibilities and establishing the Civil Society Secretariat and CS Indaba has decided to withdraw from the process. Management questions have been used to undermine the democratic space and inclusive environment created by RDSN. To this end, the RDSN board has taken this decision to pull out of the process as it feels that the World Summit on Sustainable Development Civil Society Global Forum has been hijacked by the South African government and Allied forces. The Civil Society Global Forum integrity has therefore, been undermined and the forum is now a government-led forum.
RDSN with other organisations are preparing an alternative process, which will respect the integrity of civil society, and secure the meaningful participation of all the marginalised major groups.
Issued by the RDSN Board
Contact:
Edward Cottle
(011) 403 7324
0983271297
eddie@rdsn.org.za
Over the past few months a perception has been created that problems around management and representation of South African civil society in the world summit process is at the center of intra-civil society conflict. This is not so. Rather, a political struggle has emerged over how civil society must prepare and organise for the World Summit Civil Society Global Forum!
Background
In August 2002 hundreds of governments, mass-based organisations and non-governmental organisations will gather in Johannesburg at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). The main purpose of this summit is to review progress on the environment and development since the previous summit the Brazilian City of Rio de Janeiro. The Rural Development Services Network (RDSN) believes that the World Summit Civil Society Global Forum is going to be one of the most significant events to unite, mass-based women, youth and religious organisation, NGO’s and urban and rural social movements against global oppression and expliotation.
Throughout the 1990’s significant anti-globalisation movements have emerged in most regions of the world to challenge the rule of imperialist financial houses and neo-liberal policies in particular. From the Zapatistas in 1994 who stood against the dictatorship of the free market to the mass demonstrations of trade unions, community organisation, environmentalists, peasants and farmer organisations, students and feminists in Seattle, Washington, Melbourne, Prague, Nice and Genoa. In every continent mass organizations have blocked highways, battled multinational corporations, taken over parliaments and have embarked upon land invasions such as the 500 000 member strong Rural Landless Workers Movement (MST) of Brazil who resettled 200 000 families. The struggles in the regions of the world are a reflection and a response to the growing inequality and impoverishment of the majority of the people and the enrichment of the few. The Civil Society Global Forum in Johannesburg is therefore central to bringing together the collective experience of the worlds progressive and revolutionary social forces in an attempt to reverse the continued degradation of the planets ecosystem and reversing the growing sea of poverty and unemployment.
The Civil Society Indaba is formed!
When RDSN started a process of consultation within South African civil society there was no blueprint of how we were supposed to be organised. A series of consultations started in March including two sets of provincial meetings in all of our countries nine provinces. The CS Indaba was formerly launched in September 2001 and was the mouthpiece of South African civil society. By December 2002 the CS Indaba had adopted a model managed to bring together organisation of women, youth, faith, NGO’s, communities urban, communities rural, labour, informal economic sector, People with Disability and First People as major groups. We had also, decided to have provinces represented as they provided the link to communities and their issues and struggles. In total the CS Indaba provided representation for 10 major groups and all 9 provinces in the country.
Our model for the civil society process was based upon an the following principles adopted:
1. The Indaba must follow a mass based approach
2. A mass based approach applies to alliances as well
3. Our first allies are in Africa and in the South
4. The Indaba must encourage a diversity of voices
5. Government should be engaged but should do so with caution
6. It Indaba must operate on the basis of accountability and democracy
The principles above were codified in our “Call to Action” platform document which provided our political understanding of the failures of Rio and a vision of struggle. That we had to prepare and provide the basis of mass mobilisation, nationally, in Africa, the South and the North. In short, we were to prepare a militant and united programe for the Civil Society Global Forum.
The process to forming the CS Indaba was an important political milestone in South Africa’s post-apartheid history. For the first time a conscious effort had been made to form an alliance of civil society organisation of all kinds on a common political platform. Herein lie the danger as seen by government and it allied partners.
The role of the Government
In 1996 the South African government implemented a neo-liberal macro-economic policy called, Growth, Employment and Redistribution Strategy (GEAR). Like all other neo-liberal policies worldwide, the government prepared to privatise social services and reduce taxes for the rich. The consequences in SA have been extremely harsh. South Africa is now the country with the highest rate of income inequality between the poor and the rich and has overtaken Brazil. Over 1 million workers have lost their jobs and 10 times more people have died due to cholera in the past 19 months than the preceding 20 years! The government is also, resisting the provision of antri-viral drugs to save the lives of thousands of unborn, children, women and men who are HIV positive.
On the broader political landscape, the government is also planning to launch its New Economic Plan for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), the continental version of GEAR! The ANC/SACP/COSATU Alliance is to “…develop a common vision on NEPAD before the African Union Summit in July.” It is the agenda of NEPAD that is to be launched in August as Africa’s plan for sustainable development! At the African Civil Society Forum in Nairobi, Kenya on 15-16 October 2001, noted that the plan, “…did not emerge out of a process of consultation that involved all aspects of civil society. This goes against a culture and practice of participatory democracy.” The meeting also, noted that the plan contains “…all the aspects of structural adjustment programmes imposed by the Bretton Woods institutions on the continent.” An independent and vibrant civil society, which has recently adopted “A Call to Action” and an African Civil Society Forum who regards NEPAD as an obstacle to sustainable development, does not bode well for the objectives of government.
The destabilization and dissolution of the CS Indaba
The achievements of the CS Indaba while limited have on all counts have had enormous political impact on the process in preparation for the CS Global Forum.
COSATU and SANCO staged a walkout on 13 December 2001. The COSATU-led fight against the CS Indaba accusing it of not being representative and having serious management problems was merely a mask for a deeper political difference on how the Global Forum should be organised and what political positions it must take.
COSATU & SANCO objected to:
§ The representation of First People as a major group
§ The representation of provinces and their voting rights
§ The fact that black business was not represented
§ The definition of a community urban major group to mean the same as “civic” major group
§ That the management committee was not representative of all major groups
While, a mediation process was agreed to, COSATU in a dishonorable manner led a process to setting up an alternative to the CS Indaba called the Civil Society Multi-stakeholder Forum. What is not surprising is that this forum is less representative than the former CS Indaba and has only 7 major groups and has totally excluded provincial representation. Key major groups such as communities urban, communities rural and First People have been excluded! The communities urban and rural comprise of the emerging social movements that have been struggling against privatisation and the lack of land reform in South Africa.
Indeed, after all the attacks by government in the form of privatisation, COSATU had yet again suspended its anti-privatisation strike indefinitely. COSATU’s president, Willie Madisha has also stated that, “The interactions that we’ve had with the ANC in the (form of) bilateral meetings in particular, have actually helped us come closer together.”
So, we see that it is not accidental that when the walkout happened COSATU and SANCO declared that the problem with the CS Indaba is that it gives too much power to ‘anti-government NGO’s.” A similar picture emerged at the World Conference on Racism (WCAR) in Durban when COSATU and its allied partners refused to participate in a civil society march protesting at the lack of progress in transformation concerning issues of racial inequality. Instead, the ANC/SACP/COSATU Alliance had a pro-government march. The logic of the closeness between COSATU and the ANC means that mass struggle and the development of a critical perspective around NEPAD must be compromised.
As the CS Indaba had developed a “Call to Action” as its platform towards the Global Forum, this was essentially in political conflict with the COSATU-led bloc who was pulling in a direction which was more comfortable with the South African government. After a series of political maneuvers, with the help of certain SANGOCO leaders, they had managed to stop logistical preparations and the funding of the CS Indaba, thereby, rendering it ineffective and demoralizing the activist layer.
The next logical step in the evolution of the COSATU-led bloc was the Memorandum of Understanding between the government secretariat called the Johannesburg World Summit Company (JOWSCO). This new forum led by COSATU has given the organisation of the Civil Society Global Forum over to the government secretariat on a silver platter. The handing over to the government secretariat has effectively also, dissolved the civil society secretariat functions. The government secretariat is now tasked to:
1. Manage all the accreditation of all delegates to the Civil Society Global Forum
2. Install information kiosks at the Global Forum venue
3. Jointly manage a media centre at the Global Forum
4. Assist in the management of the exhibition, cultural and other events taking place. The opening and closing ceremonies will meet the needs of both parties.
The implications of this new agreement with government means that government will have a direct say over which civil society organisations get accredited; that civil society has provided the government National Intelligence a legitimate base from which to work; that our information becomes state controlled and that our “independent” actions become limited to a government organised Global Forum.
The above agreement with the South African government could only have been made with the dissolution of the CS Indaba whose militant platform was in contradiction to the COSATU-led bloc. In particular, COSATU had to marginalise the community urban and community rural social movements who represented an independent political force. A repeat of the kind of action in the city of Durban was not desirable.
Furthermore, the First People represented an embarrassment to the South African government who as a black government has totally neglected the burning land questions facing this major group.
The Rural Development Services Network (RDSN) after 13 months of having provided the legal and fiduciary responsibilities and establishing the Civil Society Secretariat and CS Indaba has decided to withdraw from the process. Management questions have been used to undermine the democratic space and inclusive environment created by RDSN. To this end, the RDSN board has taken this decision to pull out of the process as it feels that the World Summit on Sustainable Development Civil Society Global Forum has been hijacked by the South African government and Allied forces. The Civil Society Global Forum integrity has therefore, been undermined and the forum is now a government-led forum.
RDSN with other organisations are preparing an alternative process, which will respect the integrity of civil society, and secure the meaningful participation of all the marginalised major groups.
Issued by the RDSN Board
Contact:
Edward Cottle
(011) 403 7324
0983271297
eddie@rdsn.org.za
Eddie Cottle
e-mail:
eddie@rdsn.org.za
