|
James Debono
The Voluntary Organisations Bill may prove to become a boomerang for Maltese non-governmental organisations. After being the first to call for a law to regulate the voluntary sector, they are now up in arms against a bill they fear will stifle their independence.
The coordinator of cultural NGO Inizjamed, Adrian Grima, denounced the proposed legislation as an exercise in big brother paternalism. And Lino Bugeja, the president of the Ramblers Association said his organisation will not apply for enrolment in the proposed register for recognised NGOs.
The Voluntary Organisations Bill is in its second reading in parliament but so far the government has ignored recommendations made by the NGO legislation working group back in November to change the law.
Faced by the realities of European Union membership which makes funding dependable on some form of legal recognition, Maltese NGOs want government to come up with a law which regulates the sector.
Cases of fraud and lack of accountability in some organisations also spurred the voluntary sector to press for legislation to control abuse.
But NGOs are now denouncing the proposed law for curtailing their independence and for giving the minister responsible for social solidarity, widespread discretionary powers.
The major bone of contention is that the law gives too much power to an all-powerful commissioner, appointed and paid by the government.
According to the new law the commissioner may refuse any application for the enrolment of voluntary organisations on the basis “of the integrity or otherwise of the organisation, and the credibility of the proposals,” of the organisation.
Although enrolment is voluntary, the commissioner’s powers also affect organisations which opt not to enrol themselves.
The law will give the commissioner powers to monitor the activities of organisations to ensure the observance of the law, providing them with information on benefits and responsibilities deriving from registration, and to investigate complaints against voluntary organisations.
Lino Bugeja sums up his fears by the phrase “who pays the piper sets the tune”.
“Since the commissioner is appointed by the government our independence will be stifled. As things stand now, we stand by our decision not to enrol our organisation in the new register if the law is not changed.”
Adrian Grima agrees. “Let’s face it: we live in a country in which some powers that be feel they have the almost ‘divine’ right to tell NGOs what they have to say… with the totally unacceptable discretionary powers given to a person appointed, and paid by the government, to watch over the NGOs, this paternalistic attitude seems to be as strong as ever.”
According to Grima the aim of the law should not be to control the NGO sector, so that environmentalists and social and cultural activists are kept in check by the powers that be. “The aim of the law should be to recognise and regulate the functioning of the sector, not to place a Big Brother that watches over them and tampers with the independence of the NGOs, which is their and their country’s lifeblood.”
Grima says the thriving Maltese NGO sector, which looks at issues in the face and refuses to toe the “party” line, is even more important due to “the patriarchal nature of (Malta’s) institutions. Even more important than in other countries, he adds, where the institutions respect the activist and the artist and do not challenge their independence and freedom of expression.
Lino Bugeja is concerned his organisation’s role as a “green whistleblower”, which many times expresses disagreement with government policies, could be undermined.
Bugeja proposes that the post of commissioner for the voluntary sector should be simply abolished and that instead a commission should assume his role.
Grima wants the commissioner, or a commission, to be appointed by parliament and should answer to parliament, like the ombudsman.
The present bill simply states that before appointing the commissioner, the minister should consult with parliament’s social affairs committee. It also proposes empowering the commissioner to coordinate efforts by voluntary organisations to avoid duplication of efforts and to promote the creation of federations of NGOs.
Lino Bugeja is deeply suspicious of these powers as they could impinge on NGOs who place their independence above government funding. “The power to force NGOs to coordinate their efforts could impinge on organisations who value their independence above any prospect of funding.”
Grima laments that the big brother attitude is evident in the way the issue of media access was shot down by the government, saying the issue “is particularly salient in Malta, as media access for NGOs has been very much on an ad hoc basis so far.”
Other organisations contacted by MaltaToday expressed similar reservations on the new law, saying they stand by a statement issued in November when the final draft of the law was published.
On that occasion the NGO working group argued that for the past years it was asking for the introduction of a simple and functional legal framework for NGOs to make them accountable for the services they provide to Maltese society.
But despite their submissions, the resultant bill failed to take into consideration many of their concerns.
According to the working group, the bill defines voluntary organisations as ‘independent of government’ but, in the same breath, seems to allow certain governmental entities to pass themselves off as voluntary organisations.
The group also questioned the wide discretionary powers of the commissioner. In their statement the NGOs included comments by Douglas Rutzen, president of the International Center for Not-for Profit Law, who described the draft law as one of the most regulatory, prescriptive laws he has seen in the EU. Rutzen said he considered it over-regulatory for civil society and under-regulatory for government.
Speaking at the opening of the debate on the Voluntary Organisations Bill in Parliament, Family and Social Solidarity Minister Dolores Cristina stressed that the aim of the law was not intended to remove or diminish the independence or identity of voluntary organisations, but to ensure transparency and accountability in their activities.
The minister said enrolment would be voluntary but important, since it would certify that the organisation was truly voluntary and that the activities were transparent and accountable.
She rebutted criticism made by NGOs on the recognition of government-controlled entities as voluntary organisations. Only organisations set up by the government for social aims, which were non-profit, would qualify as voluntary organisations, she said.
The minister said that the Charities Commission website of the UK states that government authorities could set up charities. What was important was that the purpose for which the body existed was completely charitable.
jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt
|
