During the last few decades the global community has witnessed an extraordinary leap in the positive impact civil societies have had on the communities they served. Their support for children, the young, the elderly, the challenged, and the disadvantaged... their advocacy for human rights and the rights of minorities... their campaigns on environmental threats; consumer rights; child abuse and domestic violence... and their attention to recreational and educational opportunities — as well as the preservation of culture and the arts has not only prioritized these issues on the planning agendas of nations but it has also enabled these civil society associations to position themselves as “the” indispensable 3rd sector development building blocks from which strong and prosperous nations emerge.
As global communities fast-forward themselves to become self-reliant through the systematic incorporation (licensing) of civil society associations, our local efforts are repeatedly blocked by obsolete bureaucracy and excessive restrictions that thwart any attempt to establish “civil society” initiatives as legitimate “non”governmental organizations.
The negative impact of blocking the creation of independent civil society associations is something that cannot be ignored. For one, bureaucracy kills the passion and determination of good-willed citizens and thus aborts good “citizenship” actions; and second, it encourages the growth of a negative, passive “laissez faire” local culture; and third, it creates a fertile breeding ground for unsystematic activities to operate — albeit informally under the radar.
None of the above situations are healthy and stable states-of-being for any nation to find itself in — and certainly not for nations that are embarking on the path of sociopolitical reforms. Instead of building the much needed bridges between service providers and their clients, the above situations widen and increase the partnership divide between government entities and the citizens they serve: An unfortunate waste of resources, human and financial, and an unfortunate waste of alliances, public and civil.
Whether we choose to or not, Saudi civil societies are here to stay, not because of Western agendas to democratize and liberate, but simply because human nature at its core is socially oriented and thrives to belong, to serve, to be appreciated and to be validated. Ignoring this fact will not make it go away. So I keep asking myself: Why is it that we fear them so?
It is not so long ago that a passionate and dedicated group of businessmen got together to safeguard their commercial interests — and from that grassroots economic interest, the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce was born. It is not so long ago that a group of families decided to create an educational institution for their children — and from that grassroots academic interest, King Abdul Aziz University was born. It is not so long ago that a group of women decided to cater to the needs of the poor and the needy — and from that humanitarian grassroots interest, Al-Faisaliah and Al— Khayria Charitable societies were born. It is not so long ago that a number of citizens got together to create sports groups and from the grassroots sports interest, both Al-Ahli and Al-Etihad sports clubs were born...
Even though today, most of these may have become government-sponsored nonprofit institutions, we can never change the fact that their founders were a group of good-willed, civically minded citizens who wanted to create a holistic society that caters to the diverse needs of all its people.
As I write this article, I cannot help but think of the hundreds of good-willed civically minded Saudi citizens who are initiating development projects in a most unconventional and informal manner. But before I go on to introduce them to you, allow me to ask you two quick questions:
To name a few, what do you think the following associations have in common: Education for Employment, Bank Watch Network, World Faith Development Dialogues, Transparency International, International Save the Children Alliance, Friends of Earth, Common Ground and Citizens Network for Essential Services? They are all internationally recognized nongovernmental associations funded by global endowments to work on bridging the socioeconomic, technical, political, cultural, environmental, social and legal divides that both the public and private sectors have left behind.
Similarly, I ask you, what do you think the following groups have in common: Jeddah, the Good, the Bad and the Ugly; Saudi Debate Society; RAISE Jeddah; Women Driving in Saudi Arabia; Save Corniche Jeddah; Every Saudi Stand Up; Million Votes for Reduced Prices; Recycle Jeddah? They are all informal grassroots initiatives of civically responsible groups working together, hand in hand to bridge socioeconomic and cultural divides that they have identified in their local communities. The difference, however, between the two cases is that the list in the first questions is legitimate and incorporated while the list in the second question is made up of informal citizen— led initiatives that are operating from none other than “facebook.com”.
You see, human nature is by default a solution provider. The “facebook.com” societies mentioned above have understood that there are many humanitarian needs that need to be addressed and they are addressing them. Instead of shunning them, we need to support them financially and technically; we also need to provide them with support and recognition by validating their missions so they can continue to work toward fulfilling their socially responsible efforts — publicly and sensibly.
A couple of months ago, the Shoura Council finished revising the 20-year-old law for incorporating civil societies and charitable organizations in Saudi Arabia. The revised version of this law is still pending for approval. Luckily “facebook” societies and the communities they serve do not have to stop their good work in anticipation to see what happens.
