House clears air on NGO Regulation Bill

• Lawmakers on a hidden agenda

The House began with erroneous classifications of NGOs the legislators are considering for regulation based on operational mandate that is beyond the lawmakers’ responsibilities.

Buba Jibril, in the statement remarked that some NGOs collected funds for North East IDPs and disappeared.

He explained that Churches, Mosques, Esusu, Market Women Associations not affected in the bill, noting that religious bodies and organizations are not NGOs; as well as quasi financial institutions at local levels.

“These organizations have existed for centuries to serve businesses and commerce of our market women and traders,” he remarked.

The House Deputy majority Leader stated that, “Now NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) and CSOs (Civil Society Organizations) are voluntary organizations that are registered to partner Government at all levels to fill gaps wherever they exist.”

He maintained that “they are supposed to be partners in progress with the Government; therefore, the need for a commission to serve this purpose arises.”

Jibril complained: “Secondly, and naturally for them to carry out their activities, the NGOs and CSOs solicit for funds from all over the World and collect billions of naira on behalf of Nigerians!

“Thirdly, they recruit expatriates to help them run their activities in the country with lots of abuses.

“However, recent developments have shown that; some people registered NGOs, solicited for funds and disappeared.

“That happened recently in the North East.”

ALSO SEE: Anti-NGO bill seeks to put every Nigerian in bondage – Prof Chidi Odinkalu

The lawmaker further disclosed that some NGOs are used to fund the activities of terrorists and insurgents!

He explained that “The NGOs bill, therefore, is primarily to set up a commission to regulate their activities and provide a platform for robust relationships between them and the government for the interests of Nigerians.

“In addition, it is to ensure transparency and accountability in the ways and manners the NGOs collect moneys and use them for Nigerians.”

He stated that The NGOs bill is not new or peculiar to Nigeria.

“It exists in many countries, particularly, in the ECOWAS sub-region and all over Africa and other continents.

“In Europe, Israel passed theirs last year! Kenya has a similar law since 1990! Nigeria is and should not be a banana republic where anything goes.”

Jibril expressed disappointment that “the way the NGOs are reacting to this wonderful and well packaged bill, particularly, SERAP, is not only shameful but condemnable.

“The Nigerian parliament is an institution governed by rules and traditions.”

He solicited: “When a bill is for public hearing you go there and present your views like other interested Nigerians and invited cooperate bodies and government agencies for the standing committee to do justice to the bill. Period!”

The lawmaker lamented that “Going on cheap propaganda and blackmail and even calling on World bodies, including, the United Nations to help you withdraw a bill from our National Assembly will not help you!”

Meanwhile, the House of Representatives may have embarked on deceptive project on the NGO regulatory bill or may have hidden agenda to stifle the democratic space in Nigeria.

Elementary knowledge of NGOs shows that they are actors in civil society who are not necessarily established to partner governments but the fill a vacuum between governments and citizens. NGOs are mostly classified according to the functions they perform in the society within the civil society space.

More so, NGOs and donor agencies have inherent internal mechanism of accountability and transparency in both securing and usage of funds.  Donor agencies do not release funds to NGOs on value free terms but on specified social responsibilities properly communicated in a proposal requesting for funds.

Beside, all NGOs have a process of ‘retirement’ which gives details of how funds disbursed by donor agencies were utilized on the projects for which the funds were released. The donor agency has a duty to blacklist any NGO that does not meet the specified objectives and it off from accessing further funds.  Even at the request stage, any donor agency that is not satisfied with the proposal of an NGO does not approve release of funds.

Invariably, the federal lawmakers should understand the rudiments and dynamics of the modus operandi of NGOs before embarking on such bill.