Why civil society needs to develop long-term vision of struggle

Human rights activists outside the Supreme Court in Nairobi on January 12, 2017. PHOTO | FRANCIS MDERITU | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • A key explanation for the persistence of abuse against civil society is in the character of the State.
  • We must understand the historical character of the State in order to properly conceptualise the advantages citizens reap from a legitimate State and the danger an illegitimate and predatory State poses to society.

This week, I engaged staff at the Heinrich Böll Foundation in Nairobi. The foundation is a part of the green movement affiliated to the Germany Green Party. My discussion with them veered into the complexity of politics in general and how programming can make useful interventions in society.

The staff, and indeed the foundation in general, has a commitment to advancing the fight for social justice. They share a concern to advance social justice as enshrined in our constitution. But any objective analysts of our national context will acknowledge that the years after 2013 have seen key State actors unhappy with civil society engagement. They have consequently unleashed various scare tactics and occasionally visited terror against organisations within civil society. The State has shrunk civic space.

In most of Africa, the greatest abuser of human rights remains the State. They are joined by fundamentalist organisations in society that have a flawed conception of freedom. Thus, where questions of social justice are concerned, the State sits uncomfortably at the intersection of protection and abuse. But abuse persists even though many African governments conceded to greater democratisation. This is true of Kenya where State intolerance to criticism has grown in ways not anticipated only a decade ago. What explains the gains the current government enjoys in shrinking civic space?

STATE'S CHARACTER
A key explanation for the persistence of abuse against civil society is in the character of the State. We must understand the historical character of the State in order to properly conceptualise the advantages citizens reap from a legitimate State and the danger an illegitimate and predatory State poses to society.

The State is an assemblage of power and power relations. Those holding State power decide how to use it. However, a critical character of this power is that it has a rare capacity to reproduce itself. Though those in government largely exercise this power, the State is not necessarily government. The State as an assemblage of power and power relations transcends the three arms of government even though this power influences government in critical ways.

The challenge is that civil society has a short-term conceptualisation of the State and State power. As such, organisations within civil society focus almost exclusively on government without seeing where government draws the power they deploy and how they manipulate it to serve personal and nefarious interests. Thus, civil society has been quick to celebrate minor successes in the struggle for emancipation while forgetting that the nature of the State and its power relations has a long-term existence and character that transcends the tenure of one regime power. Though the little success we celebrate represent a milestone in the struggle, the struggle remains susceptible to roll back depending on the elite holding State power.

MORE IMPACT
In order to advance social justice and realise impact in society, programmes that conceptualise the struggle as long-term have more impact than those defined by short-term targets. The focus on ticking the box must therefore be discouraged. Yet, in the last few years, support to organisations in civil society has come under a tyranny of measureable outcomes. Though most funding organisations want immediate results, the realities they seek to alter are not always easy to measure even though their consequences are intensely felt by ordinary people.

In my engagement with staff at Heinrich Böll Foundation, I identified the need for programme co-ordinators to prioritise knowledge as a critical component of programming for social justice. My emphasis on the character of the State and how this character impacts the struggle for social justice was meant to bring home two points; that having a sophisticated knowledge of key actors within the social justice terrain is indispensable to realizing change and second, that posing the challenge as long-term prepares you for a long drawn-out struggle for which success cumulated rather than instantly measureable.


Godwin Murunga teaches at the University of Nairobi.