NGOs tread lightly on China's turf By Stephanie Wang
CHANGSHA, China - As part of plans to promote "small government and big
society", to accelerate towards a market economy, the Chinese Communist Party
(CCP) has let certain non-governmental organizations (NGOs) become involved in
some government functions, such as disaster relief, social work, welfare and
legal aid.
But most observers agree the Chinese government is still omnipotent, as
apparently most officials do not want their "power" to be shared with NGOs. In
such an environment, NGOs in China still have to proceed on tiptoes.
In July, the closing down of an NGO offering pro bono legal assistance, the
Open Constitution Initiative, known as Gongmeng in Putonghua (Mandarin),
reminded the public that NGOs in China need to stay out of politics if they
want to survive. Gongmeng was
closed on the grounds of tax evasion, but it was widely believed that hostility
towards the government was the real reason.
It could be argued that Gongmeng was an isolated case of government
interference in China's NGOs, but a report on disaster relief fund management
by Deng Guosheng, associate professor of Tsinghua University's School of Public
Management and Policy, tells a different story
According to Deng's study, by November 2008, public donations to help disaster
relief in the aftermath of the Sichuan earthquake in May last year, many made
through NGOs, totaled some 65.252 billion yuan (US$9.5 billion) - excluding
donations in kind. However, about 58% of the total (37.9 billion yuan) went to
various government agencies, 36% went to government-designated Red Cross
organizations, charities and foundations and only 5.9% ended up with local
foundations less affiliated to the government.
Deng found that part of the 36% that went to government-designated
organizations in fact eventually went to government departments. Some
specifically-designated donations were even ultimately channeled to government
units for "the purpose of overall planning". Altogether, according to the
report, more than 80% of total relief donations ultimately ended up in
government accounts.
Thus, ironically, while Beijing encourages NGOs to play a bigger role in
disaster relief (which is non-political), government departments and officials
have found ways to keep NGO hands off relief funds donated by the public.
In 2004, Premier Wen Jiabao vowed to turn over more public administration
responsibility to enterprises, NGOs and intermediary organizations in his
annual government work report to the National People's Congress (NPC). Five
years later, however, and Deng's research proves this has not has taken place.
Deng's study does not imply that the government has pocketed or embezzled the
funds, but it does argue that such government involvement is an unwise move,
since it undermines the efficiency of relief efforts.
For example, NGOs are more cost-efficient that government agencies. For the
same project, the operation costs of an NGO is about 10% of that of a
government agency, if not less. Secondly, NGOs are more likely to deliver more
differentiated and customized services than bulky government units.
Moreover, as many commentaries in Chinese media point out, the government
taking away public donations for disaster relief affects people's enthusiasm to
make charity donations. It is obvious that people donate money to help
disaster-affect compatriots - not to help boost government revenues.
So, why did the government take over over Sichuan? Its response may be that
NGOs in China are too weak and fragile for such an overwhelming mission. As the
data suggest, at the beginning of the relief work, there were over 300 NGOs
involving 3 million-plus people to deliver services. However, less than a year
later, by April 2009, only some 30 NGOs survived with no more than 50,000
volunteers. Therefore, the real question to be addressed should be: why are
NGOs in China so weak?
The term NGO was first introduced in China with the "Non-Governmental Forum" at
the Fourth World Women's Conference held in Beijing in 1995. Since then, NGO
has officially been included in the Chinese political glossary. Although the
term has become more popular in recent years, it usually refers to
international NGOs. Many Chinese NGOs prefer the term "non-profit
organizations", "private organizations" or "social organizations", as the term fei
zhengfu (Chinese version of non-governmental) is easily to be perceived
as anti-government, which is of course a taboo in this country, especially
after the Tiananmen incident in 1989.
In China, according to the "Regulations on the Registration and Management of
Social Organizations" promulgated in 1998, in order to acquire full legal
recognition, an NGO has to register itself both with the Ministry of Civil
Affairs (or its local branches), and with a relevant government or party
department to oversee its business and operation. According to statistics from
the Ministry of Civil Affairs, there were 230,000 such registered "social
organizations" across the country at the end of 2008. In fact some scholars
suggest the term "government organized non-governmental organization (GONGO)"
would be more appropriate to describe the real nature of such Chinese NGOs.
It is understandable that close affiliation to government and party agencies is
likely to hamper the flexibility and creativity of NGOs, let alone their
independence. As pointed out by Dou Ruigang, the secretary-general of Tencent
Charity Foundation, those GONGOs are actually extensions of government;
therefore, donation and disbursement are operated within the government system.
Moreover, there is no way for GONGOs to assess the performance of the
government.
In reality, the registration of most organizations, due to their small size or
other reasons, is rejected by relevant supervising departments. Unable to
acquire a legal identity, such organizations have to then register as a company
or simply start work without registering at all. Some studies show that
formally registered NGOs account for only 10% of the total in operation and
that the other 90% are either registered as companies or have no registration.
For those registered as companies, taxes and fees are very likely to put the
already cash-strapped organizations out of business. As regards the latter,
without any official label, they have great difficulty in attracting serious
funds. Even worse, they could be busted at any time.
Without doubt, from the very beginning, NGOs in China have been crippled by
policy and legal restrictions. The ruling party is determined to keep tight
control on NGOs in the country over political concerns, regardless of their
nature or cause. At operational level, government departments and officials are
not willing to give their "power" or "authority" away to NGOs.
However, "a can of worms", so to speak, has already been opened, as the
government obviously does not have sufficient resources to deal with a myriad
of social problems entailed by its massive economic reform.
Analysts believe Beijing is gradually developing a better understanding of a
future role for NGOs. The Ministry of Civil Affairs expressed willingness to
"make friends" with grass-roots charity organizations at the end of 2008 and
Beijing is currently working on revising 1998 civil society regulations.
According to the Hong Kong daily newspaper Wen Wei Po, the following reforms
may be considered by Beijing. Firstly, Charities engaging in social welfare and
relief work will not have to register twice any more, meaning, registration
with the Ministry of Civil Affairs (or its local branches) will suffice.
Secondly, the ministry will introduce a record and registration system for
rural charities without a judicial person and registration procedures will be
simplified. Finally, access restrictions on foreign charities will be relaxed
to some degree and they will be allowed to set up offices in China.
More encouraging news comes from Shenzhen city, a poster child for reform,
which has signed an agreement with the Ministry of Civil Affairs on a trial run
of a comprehensive set of reforms in the management of civil affairs. A major
goal of the reform is to scrap the double registration mechanism. Liu Runhua,
director of Shenzhen Department of Civil Affairs believed that with the reform,
the number of "social organizations" in Shenzhen will increase significantly.
Liu also declared that the city is committed to giving full play to social
organizations and making them major providers for public services so as to
materialize the strategy of "small government and big society".
In ancient days, Chinese emperors were told that popular grievances were like a
flood, and the key to flood control was to divert rather than block it. Leaders
of today, aiming at "advancing with the times" should know better.
Stephanie Wang is a freelance contributor based in Changsha, China.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
