We have representative parliamentary democracy leaving the decision-making to a small group of elected

representatives. This could result in government of the people becoming a government off the people.
Progressive marketisation of traditional government functions has widened this gap. There is a gap between the notso-efficient state and the profit-alone-matters private sector which needs a third sector to bridge it. This is how civil
society is seen today.

Core ingredients
Governance is the process by which a society manages itself through the mechanism of the state. The core
ingredients of good governance are:
Peoples effective participation, transparency, responsiveness, consensus orientation, equity and inclusiveness, the
rule of law, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability, and strategic vision.
These are crucially value-laden and constitute the bedrock of democracy.
Innumerable administrative reform commissions have produced no appreciable impact on the quality of governance.
The emphasis now is on facilitating external pressure from citizens on the system to improve through the Right to
Information Act, Consumer Protection Act, Citizens Charters, Whistleblower protection, e-governance, Report
Cards, Democratic Decentralisation, Public Interest Litigation, etc.
Governance has three levels internal systems and procedures; cutting edge systems and procedures; and checkand-balance systems
At level (a), civil society can influence policy and project formulation through membership of committees,
submission of memoranda directly or through elected representatives, and interactive rule-making in the
implementation of policies, projects and schemes affecting citizens. The maximum day-to-day interaction between
the government and the citizens takes place and the popular image of governance is formed at level (b).
Interactions of civil society with level (c), infrequent but important, will be more of an exposure of irregularities
rather than steps for improvement in the quality of governance.

Functional contribution
Civil societys functional contribution to good governance could be:
* Watchdog against violation of human rights and governing deficiencies.
* Advocate of the weaker sections point of view.
* Agitator on behalf of aggrieved citizens.
* Educator of citizens on their rights, entitlements and responsibilities and the government about the pulse of the
people.
* Service provider to areas and people not reached by official efforts or as governments agent.
* Mobiliser of public opinion for or against a programme or policy.
Civil society acts through social capital the capacity of people to act together willingly in their common longterm interest. Social capital is strong in a homogeneous, egalitarian society.

Civil society as a whole is, therefore, unable to play its full potential role in enforcing good governance in India
except when extraordinary leadership overcomes narrow loyalties, or when an issue is of common, major concern to
all sections (like natural calamities). Smaller units of governance and decentralisation of governance are, therefore,
indispensable in India.
Individuals cannot take on the huge political-bureaucratic machine that the government is, nor can the entire civil
society act on behalf of every citizen. Civil society, therefore, has to operate through compact, focused organisations
based on strong social capital.
The Government of Indias National Policy on the Voluntary Sector, 2006 envisages encouraging an independent,
creative and effective voluntary sector. Support for NGOs, however, cannot be blindly sentimental. The government
has to assess their suitability, capability and experience, and evaluate their performance continually.
Efforts to improve the quality of governance will fail if the quality and calibre of the political executive is
unsatisfactory. Civil society needs to note the deterioration in the quality, integrity and commitment of the elected
representatives and the criminalisation of politics. Voter education, electoral reforms and periodical highlighting of
the performance (or non-performance ) of elected representatives are high priority items in civil societys agenda.
Democracy is not a spectator sport (though politicians make a spectacle of themselves!) Parliamentary democracy
becomes participative democracy only with civil societys active role.

Introduction:
Since the dawn of participatory democracy, the rights of citizens such as the
freedoms of expression and of association are seen as sacrosanct. Often these
rights are written in a constitution or other public documents. When people freely
exercise these rights by volunteering to forward a valued cause, or by protesting a
government policy, they do so as part of civil society. This lends credence to the
assertion of Abbie Hoffman who said many years ago that: 'Democracy is not
something you believe in or a place to hang your hat, but it's something you do. You
participate. If you stop doing it, democracy crumbles
A significant problem in most developing countries is over-centralization of decision
making and the lack of stakeholders involvement that permit patronage of powerful
special interests and high levels of corruption. Scholars are agreed that lack of
stakeholder buy-in attenuates the policy process, decreases efficiency and this inturn affects economic growth. This is where civil society can play a major role by
contributing to greater transparency and accountability [2]
Civil society is a "space" whose function is to mediate between the individual and
the State While there may not be a clear cut definition of civil society, they more or
less agree that it comprises institutions such as religious organizations, labour
unions, charities, community groups, nonprofits, and the media. In advanced and
virile democratic systems these institutions supplement formal processes such as
voting and help citizens shape the culture, politics, and economies of their nation.

On February 14th 2012, Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson was sworn in as Governor of
Bayelsa State. On assumption of office, he pledged to operate an open government
with transparency and accountability as beacons of leadership. One of the
challenges this administration has had to grapple with is the opaque process of
governmental transactions. The administration met an empty treasury, a bloated
wage bill and an inexplicable debt burden. This prompted the setting up of the 11man Bayelsa State Financial Review Committee with a mandate to look into the
finances of the State. It was also revealed that most of the loans obtained by the
previous administration were dead-weight loans, which were used in a frivolous
manner and not for the execution of development projects. In spite of massive
misappropriation of public funds, a huge debt burden of N207billion was left behind.
Vouchers were inundated with Ghost Names wage bill was bloated and it was
corruption incorporated. To turn the tide in favour of an accountability and
transparency, government had to take steps to promote a transparent regime.
One of such steps was the initiation of the Bayelsa State Transparency Bill 2012,
which was passed into law. The purpose of the Law is to make it obligatory for all
tiers of government (State and LGAs) to publicly declare to Bayelsans, all revenues
that accrue to them as well as a summary of expenditures. Since then government
has been consistent in discussing its policies and finances publicly with her citizens,
the organized civil society and the media. This push for transparency has placed a
burden on the third-tier of government to do monthly transparency briefing. All
political office holders are also enjoined to do so. Governor Henry Seriake Dickson
underscored the importance of a transparency when he said:

On transparency, we believe that it is the right of the people of the state, to know
what funds accrue to the coffers of the state and the various local government
councils and how they are utilized. This is the only way to secure the trust and
confidence of the people in whom sovereignty lies. I have directed all local
government chairmen to comply with this paradigm shift on the issue of
transparency, probity and accountability, to reflect the new Bayelsa we are
building. [3]

The Restoration administration has entrenched transparency, accountability and

service to abolish the business-as-usual scenario which had hitherto characterized
the MDAs. The underpinning philosophy is to ensure that sustainable development
is premised on strong institutions, which will constitute the locomotive for sound
policies and programmes delivery. Whether defined as Dicksonomics or
Seriakenomics, the underlying principle is to ensure that policies and programs are
implemented without hiccups and with huge direct and spill-over benefits on the
people.

From Aristotle to John Locke and from Tocqueville to Lincoln, participatory

democracy has been a feature of human society since classical times. Participatory
democracy creates opportunities for all members of a population to make
meaningful contributions to decision-making, and seeks to broaden the range of
people who have access to such opportunities. Across time and space, it is believed
that effectively increasing the range of participation makes for better efficiency and
effectiveness in government and by extension solidifies legitimacy. [4]
Being a former Attorney General of Bayelsa State and a law maker at the highest
level of government, Governor HSD assumed office with a clear goal of increasing
peoples participation in the decision making process of government. It was for this
reason that the Governor established the office of Senior Special Assistant on Civil
Society, ostensibly to provide avenues for governmentCivil Society interaction.
Such interactions are avenues for political power holders to clarify policy issues and
programme direction to involve all segments of society along the road to change.
[5]It is the desire to operate an open government that has made this interactive
session between government and civil society possible.
What are civil society organizations?
Civil society [6]is a sphere of social interaction between the household (family) and
the state which is manifested in the norms of community cooperative, structures of
voluntary association and networks of public communication norms are values of
trust, reciprocity, tolerance and inclusion, which are critical to cooperation and
community problem solving. Structure of association refers to the full range of
informal and formal organizations through which citizens pursue common interests
(Veneklasen, 1994). Civil society is composed of autonomous associations which
develop a dense, diverse and pluralistic network. As it develops, civil society will
consist of a range of local groups, specialized organizations and linkages between
them to amplify the corrective voices of civil society as a partner in governance and
the market (Connor, 1999).
CSOs are formed by people who have common needs, interests and values like
tolerance, inclusion, cooperation and equality; and development through a
fundamentally endogenous and autonomous process which cannot easily be
controlled from outside.

Civil society has been widely recognized as an essential 'third' sector. Its strength
can have a positive influence on the state and the market. Civil society is therefore
seen as an increasingly important agent for promoting good governance like
transparency, effectiveness, openness, responsiveness and accountability. Civil
society can further and improve good governance, first, by policy analysis and
advocacy; second, by regulation and monitoring of state performance and the
action and behavior of public officials; third, by building social capital and enabling

citizens to identify and articulate their values, beliefs, civic norms and democratic
practices; fourth, by mobilizing particular constituencies, particularly the vulnerable
and marginalized sections of masses, to participate more fully in politics and public
affairs; and fifth, by development work to improve the wellbeing of their own and
other communities.

Underscoring the importance of civil society, Thomas Jefferson asserted:

I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people
themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control
with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but inform
their discretion."
From the above assertion, ultimate power resides with the people-the civil society.
In measured doses, they control the exercise of that power through constructive
engagements with political power holders. In most cases critical policy decisions are
better fashioned out when they are subjected to the crucible of civil society debates
and criticism. Thus the power exercised by the electorate via the ballot box; the
criticism to which public policies are subjected, the debates carried out by NGOs,
CSOs and faith-based organizations verge onpolitical legitimacy.
CSOs: From Modern to Post-Modernism
The concept of civil society (a sphere regulated by the civilcode) has been changing
over time. Hegel [7]believes that civil society is the realm of economic relationships
as they exist in the modern industrial capitalist society. Viewed from this
perspective, civil society had emerged at the particular period of capitalism and
served its interests: individual rights and private property. For Hegel, civil society
manifested contradictory forces. Being the realm of capitalist interests, there is a
possibility of conflicts and inequalities within it. Hegel's contention is that the
inequalities inherent in capitalism made it imperative for people to establish
relations to ensure society is efficiently run.
For Marx, civil society was the 'base' where productive forces and social relations
were taking place, whereas political society was the 'superstructure. Like Hegel, Karl
Marx establishes a link between capitalism and civil society. Marx posits that the
political society the superstructure represents the interests of the bourgeoisie, the
dominant class under capitalism. Karl Marx deviated a bit from Hegel when he
visualized that the state cannot be a neutral problem solver, but a defender of the
interest of the bourgeoisie.[8]
AntonioGramsci (Edwards 2004:10)[9]in his view did not consider civil society as
coterminous with the socio-economic base of the state. Rather, Gramsci located

civil society in the political superstructure. He espoused the crucial role of civil
society as the contributor of the cultural and ideological capital required for the
survival of the hegemony of capitalism. Gramsci therefore viewed civil society as
the site for problem-solving. Such roles according to Neo-liberal thinkers include
defending people against the state and the market and in asserting the democratic
will to influence the state. In addition, Neo-liberal thinkers consider civil society as a
site for struggle to subvert authoritarian regimes. Within the context of a
democratic society, civil society constitutes a strong pillar as a defender of rights,
protector of liberties, and all paraphernalia of good governance.
Post-modern thinkers after the collapse of the Soviet Union, hold the view that the
concept of civil society is a neo-liberal ideology legitimizing development of the
third sector as a substitute for the welfare state. The Washington Consensus of the
1990s, which involved conditioned loans by the World Bank and IMF to debt-laden
developing states, also created pressures for states in poorer countries to shrink.
Since then, greater emphasis on civil society as a panacea, replacing the state's
service provision and social care though not the magic bullet as some social
reformers may want us to believe. [10]
By the end of the 1990s civil society was seen less as a panacea amid the growth of
the anti-globalization movement and the transition of many countries to democracy;
instead, civil society was increasingly called on to justify its legitimacy and
democratic credentials. This led to the creation by the UN of a high level panel on
civil society. With the emergence of nongovernmental organizations and the New
Social Movements (NSMs)[11]on a global scale in the 1990's, civil society became a
platform for strategic action to construct 'an alternative social and world order.
Thus, civil society has become even more prominent with the resurgence of
democracy in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
There have been very healthy arguments about the relevance or otherwise of CSO's
CSOs are also important in creating what is increasingly referred to as 'social
capital'. Social capital is the web of associations, networks and norms (such as
trust and tolerance) that enable people to cooperate with one another for the
common good. Like economic and human capital, social capital is a productive asset
that accumulates with use the institutional arrangements and values which make
up social capital constitute the foundation for good governance, economic
prosperity and healthy societies (Vaneklasen, 1994).

Arguments and Merits of CSOs

A UK based CSO; mySociety builds websites that give people simple, tangible
benefits in the civic and community aspects of their lives and teaches the public
and voluntary sectors, through demonstration, how to use the internet most

efficiently to improve lives

Work to persuade government that releasing data is ultimately beneficial, not
costly
Find a champion who will hope promote your cause within government
Demonstrate the value that can be unlocked from the data that has been released
If you can't get what you want, try and use what you have e.g. Kenyan Hansard
PDFs
Build simple, effective tools that deliver tangible
Focus on simple approaches that deliver benefits build use confidence by seeing
positive results from their actions
If good solutions already exist government or non-government, don't try to
replicate
If a channel exists already, use it don't necessarily ask for permission
Over the years there have been arguments in favour of CSOs. The dominant view is
that CSOs are perceived as more flexible, participatory and responsive to local
needs of the poor. There is the belief that State policies are typically urban based,
delivering to politically favored areas (Lehmann, 1990). [12]

CSOs can potentially foster and support grassroots organizations to become more
numerous, sizable, resourceful, and self-reliant. Also, grassroots contacts enable
CSOs to provide critical information on potential crisis and thus contribute to early
warning systems.

There is the cost effective argument. Typically, CSOs require less financial inputs
than government agencies and therefore are more cost effective, an attribute that is
important in financially constrained third world countries.

CSOs can be more resourceful and innovative as they involve local communities in
the identification and resolution of development problems which are more cost
effective, more sustainable, and more compatible with community values and
norms.

Over and above these direct development roles, CSOs also have a very important
advocacy role to play in promoting effective governance.

CSOs, can potentially contribute to local economic development and respond to the
growing challenge of poverty in a number of ways. CSOs can improve the local
business investment climate; encourage new enterprises and livelihood
programmes. Very committed CSOs can also deliver social services, provide training
and capacity building programmes; and contribute to relief and rehabilitation in
times of disaster.
CSOs and Nexus with Good Governance
Perhaps, the most conspicuous role played by CSOs is in the area articulating
citizens' interests and demands is an important function performed by Civil Society
Organizations, CSOs. The importance of CSO's can better be appreciated when state
policies and the programs of government agencies do not take account sufficiently
of needs of the poor or of some other vulnerable sections. CSOs bridge the gap by
way of representing the interest of the people. CSO's also engage in defending the
rights of the down-trodden especially groups that suffer extreme social exclusion.

CSOs that are virile are capable of articulating the interests and demands of is a key
function served by almost every civil society organization. While political scientists
have traditionally ascribed the function of interest articulation to political parties,
such parties are not always strong in developing countries, and even where they are
strong, they do not always represent the interests of the poor.

CSOs play the critical role in mobilizing social capital. Social capital is a resource
that any community possesses to some level and it can help in resolving multiple
problems of a collective nature. Like any other resource, however, social capital also
needs to be activated and it needs to be combined with other kinds of resources,
including physical, financial and human resources. CSOs can improve the
accountability profile of governments.

Accountability has three dimensions: financial accountability implies an obligation of

the persons handling resources, public offices or any other position of trust to report
on the intended and actual use of the resources. Political accountability implies
regular and open methods of sanctioning or rewarding those who hold positions of
public trust through a system of checks and balances. Administrative accountability
implies system of control internal to the government including civil service
standards and incentives, ethical codes and administrative reviews UN (1996) [13]

At the level of society, there is need to promote communication between citizens

based groups and community members. The level and periodicity of such
interactions between CSOs and communities need to be strengthened. CSOs need
also to build capacity for monitoring how local operators of donor programmes
utilize donor fund. Wanting to know how local operators of donor projects and
foundations spend their funds and how well the projects are run is both reasonable
and necessary, because local operators of donor projects may divert from the
original goals of the donor.

Through the free flow of information, which is clear and accessible, civil society
groups, particularly a vibrant press, can serve as a monitoring mechanism to ensure
that government. Policies are carried out in a manner intended and thereby
significantly contribute to good governance.
The level of community participation in development projects and programmes
increases Community participation is now generally seen as providing several major
benefits to project and programme managers, especially in times of budget distress
and structural adjustment. First, it can lead to increased mobilization of financial
and non-financial resources (labour, material, information). Second, it can make for
greater effectiveness in planning and implementation of development initiatives, by
adapting them to local circumstances. Third, it can help to improve the maintenance
of assets and infrastructure through local resource contribution and management.
Fourth, community participation can contribute to local experience in providing local
services, and hence stimulate the development of other forms of local institutions.
This is another area CSOs have a role to play. Synergy between government and
CSOs is capable of enhancing accountability and more equitable distribution of
benefits.

Challenges facing CSOs in Nigeria

In Nigeria, CSOs face numerous challenges. The most pronounced among such
problems is the allegation that civil society organizations often lack competent
administrators and technicians, or financial and material resources. In intermediary
NGOs, with often unclear structures of accountability, their anchorage in local
society and their legitimacy can vary greatly hence they are subject to abuses. [14]
Many CSOs and NGOs are highly dependent on foreign aid, which often reinforces
their already weak systems of accountability to those for whose benefit they
ostensibly exist. From the modus operandi of most CSOs in Nigeria, it is obvious that
a great many of them are small, localized, and uncoordinated hence they can hardly
key into State and national development policies. With a very weak organizational

structure and porous financial base, most CSOs find it difficult to engage in effective
advocacy work.
In Nigeria, because of our languid road to democracy and most civil society
organizations are distrustful of their governments and their policies. This tendency
has been exacerbated by the history of grassroots interaction with governments,
which is filled with broken promises, indifference, corruption, and clientelism. It is
not surprising therefore that some CSOs are cynical and even reluctant to deal with
governments. Again, when such NGOs tend to go it alone, they lack the capacity to
achieve their goals. This is due largely to the fact that they can hardly create an
environment. However a critical advantage that CSOs usually have over statesponsored organizations concerns their ability to tap, effectively and legitimately,
into societies' reservoirs of social capital.

Another challenge is that Clear lines of relationship between civil society and the
state is yet to be established in many developing countries; the pattern of
relationship is constantly in a flux (cooperative, conflictual, integrative or even
nonexistent), depending on the context and issues involved. Many governments in
the developing world are yet to come to terms with the role CSOs should play.
Equally CSOs still need to learn how well to apply themselves to government issues.
Both sides need more education on the art and practice of participatory
governance.

Some CSOs have an undeniable role to play in modern democracy but because of
their confrontational posturing, public office holders find it difficult to dialogue with
them. The panacea should be that CSOs should accept that partnership is a more
useful tool in their dealings with government. Indeed unlearning absolutism and
militarism and learning cooperation and consultation are the major challenges in
this regard

Good politics is not necessarily good economics; legislators and civil society
advance interests of their constituents, which may be too narrowly focused and
short-sighted to reflect the overall national interest. Thus their participation in the
budget debate skews choices away from what is best for the country. It is the
executive's mandate to produce the budgets; active participation by CSOs and the
legislature may cause unnecessary delay without necessarily improving the budget
process.
Conclusion & Recommendations:
From the dry, arid desert in Northern Nigeria to the blood stained creeks of the
Niger Delta, the loud chorus of poverty, hunger and deprivation seems to rent the

sky. That explains why 52ears after independence, the ILO and World Bank were
comfortable to report that two-third or 86 percent of the 160 million populations live
below the poverty line, and less than 50 percent of Nigerians has access to safe
water and health facilities. The literacy index is generally deteriorating and efforts
to improve the situation are undermined by poverty. [15]

In the realm of good governance, Nigeria has a lot to do to re-engineer her electoral
system. Our politics is bereft of sound value-orientation and ideological
underpinning. That is why some civil society organizations engage in criminal
silence in spite of the large scale corruption pervading the land. Akinkugbe (2003)
[16]rightly observed that:
In the four decades of Nigeria's political independence, we have witnessed a steady
decline in values, quality of governance, commitment and the integrity of our
environment. Our society has become negatively permissive and much passes for
norm today that would have caused a raising of eyebrows in yonder years.
In 2005, both ActionAid and DevNet independently applied to implement the Civil
Society Index in Nigeria and subsequently decided to collectively undertake the
project. The main objective of the CSI is to assess the state of civil society in Nigeria
in order to enhance the strength and sustainability of civil society and to strengthen
civil society's contribution to positive social change. An important outcome of the
CSI process was generating and sharing useful and relevant knowledge on the state
of civil society as well as increasing the capacity and commitment of civil society
stakeholders towards the strengthening of civil society..[17]
Monitoring and Oversight: CSOs should not be exempted from monitoring and
traditional oversight. The registration requirements of CSOs should have renewal
provisions that demand evidence of positive results produced and audited
statements of accounts [18]

As a veritable step towards building sustainable cooperation and partnership

between government and civil society groups in the country is a key requirement in
this regard. To promote government/CSOs partnership, access to information on
both sides should be guaranteed by law. For now, this will be facilitated by the
Freedom of Information Act in existence. It is not enough to demand that
government be open to citizens based groups, non-governmental organizations
should also be ready to account for funds received from donors. This will promote
mutual trust and reciprocity. [19]
In Kenya MZALENDO means Keeping an eye on the Kenyan Parliament The
platform makes it possible for people to access to information on Bills, motions,

hansard,attendance records with a view to condemning the entrenched culture of

apathy towards politics. Mzalendois the only free Parliamentary Monitoring Site in
Sub-Saharan Africa[20]. CSOs in Nigeria can borrow from such examples.
IT is recommended that given the need for a local funding base for civil society
activities in Nigeria, the right to access to public funding for charitable purposes
should be guaranteed by law. Such public funding should however be established
within a politically neutral administrative framework, with well-defined criteria and
procedures for accessing it.[21]

There is a need for a well-structured institutional arrangement for partnership

between civil society organizations, government and MDAs. Such arrangements
should make it easy for CSOs and other citizens-based groups to partner with
government in policy formulation, implementation and monitoring with the ultimate
goal of promoting transparency and accountability.[22]

In Nigeria, there are very visible areas of contention in the polity. There is the knotty
challenge of revenue allocation among the three tiers of government verging on the
operation of an equitable fiscal federalism Issues of Federal Character concerning
federal character in key government appointments and distribution of federal
projects. Year back, our leadership promised to entrench a just, egalitarian and
equitable society. Now, good governance as expressed in popular participation, in
decision-making, transparency and accountability in the management of fiscal
resources is at its embryonic stage. We need committed, vehement and well
structured advocacy on these areas. One of such urgent areas is the achievement of
the MDGs and specifically poverty alleviation.[23]

I have not given up on Nigeria (maybe you have given up). The challenges we face
as a nation are the litmus test of our collective resolve to live together. Invariably,
as we walk on the thorny path to nationhood, though at a snail speed, I am
confident that the centripetal forces are beginning to overwhelm those forces that
threaten to tear us apart. We shall remain united, resolved and committed to solve
our common problems with even greater vigour. When CSOs work in synergy with
government to protect human rights, strengthen government institutions, alleviate
poverty, combat corruption and promote an open government, the benefits will far
outweigh the sacrifices.