After long deliberations, the Shoura Council has passed and forwarded the draft bill to set up a commission to regulate the activities of nongovernmental organizations in the Kingdom pending higher authorities’ approval. The proposed commission will be called “the National Commission for Private Societies and Nongovernmental Organizations.” The council took two full years to discuss in detail the clauses and articles in the original bill to fashion the final version.

Members of the council undoubtedly deserve the appreciation and thanks of the people, particularly for providing more flexibility to the original text of the bill taking into consideration the suggestions of experts in various fields from outside the council.

The amended draft provides room for wider humanitarian activities with reduced scope for direct intervention by the commission in the NGO activities. It also limits the minimum number of the founding members of an organization to 10. Another feature is the provision for associations of various categories. While it concedes greater authority to the organizations, the bill regulates a private society’s relations with the outside world. The system to monitor the financial sources of a society has been more flexible and less complex with more room for maneuver. It also denies the commission any right to interfere in the election of members of a society. The bill stipulates that the courts will have the final say if there is any dispute between the commission and a society in the matter of dissolving the society. The society will also have the right to complain or appeal.

Despite all the above-mentioned changes or provisions that have the potential to bring the NGOs in the Kingdom closer to the internationally recognized NGO concept of creative partnership and cooperation between citizens and governments, there are some clauses in the bill, which nearly nullify all its positive features.

The fundamental flaws in the new bill could be summed up as follows:

A clause in the bill stipulates that the commission should be headed by a member of the Council of Ministers. This will virtually deprive the commission of its independent status. The presence of a Cabinet member apparently makes the commission a governmental body denying it the envisaged autonomy, which is central to the NGO concept. While the state service is a national obligation and responsibility, the NGO concept is based on voluntary service. In other words, the clause would convert the commission into a government department. This militates against the spirit of NGO activities. That is why the head of the commission should be one who is free to devote his full attention to the nongovernmental sector. He should also be a fair-minded and well-known person.

The name given to the commission, “the National Commission for Private Societies and Nongovernmental Organizations,” is not befitting its role. A more suitable name would be “the National Commission for Nongovernmental Organizations” which encompasses every thing between family and government. It also conforms to the role of NGO organizations as it is understood the world over.

The nongovernmental organizations, with a wider perspective than private or charitable activities, include trade unions and societies in the field of culture, rights, professions, women, youth etc. where some people jointly strive for the promotion of common causes. Private societies are, obviously, part of the NGOs, and not the other way round.

The new draft gives absolute freedom to the commission to approve, deny or not to reply to any request to establish new organizations. The new regulations also deny the societies the right to complain or object to the decision of the commission if it denies permission to establish new societies. The stipulation also lacks clarity with regard to the length of time in which the commission should respond to an application for the establishment of a new society. It would mean that the commission could indefinitely postpone its decision with no valid reason. This provision contradicts the international and humanitarian standards for issuing permits to form NGOs. Therefore a period of time, say, one or two months, should be specified in the relevant clause so that the commission can give a reply, affirmative or negative, specifying the reasons for its decision. And if the commission does not respond within the stipulated time it would mean that the commission has no objection to the founding of a new society.

The new bill stipulates that a NGO would be denied permission to operate if its bylaws contain any clause contradicting the regulations of the commission, any other general regulations or if it is against the commonly accepted standards of behavior in society or Shariah law. Nobody would disagree with this provision on principle. But this generalized statement does not offer any clear definition of what these standards of behavior or regulations are. This could serve as a double-edged weapon as the standards of behavior are relative and vary from place to place and from time to time. The bill, I think, should have specifically stated that there should not be any violation of the basic principles and values of the Shariah on which the Muslim scholars unanimously agree. We formulate regulations on the foundation of constant values, not on shifting individual opinions. Therefore, any nongovernmental organization, which does not question or challenge the basic religious principles of Islam and the political legitimacy and the national unity of the Kingdom should be allowed to function even if it does not conform to certain jurisprudential opinions or differing views of various Madhhabs (religious schools of thought) or different scholars of a single religious school of thought.

I hope that these views will be taken into consideration when the higher authorities review the bill. It aims at protecting the interests of the people, strengthening the national values and culture and affirming the obligations of the organizations to work in line with the Shariah and the political leadership of the Kingdom.

— Dr. Mohammed Alanezi is a Saudi writer based in Riyadh. E-mail: alanezi@hotmail