ANNEX IV

C. Draft Papers Received

e. Friends of the Environment Association:Case Study on Governance from Egypt

/ The World Bank

Governance Knowledge Sharing Program (GKSP)

Policy Initiatives and Reforms in the MENA Region

Review Workshop

TheFriendsof the Environment Association:

A Case Study on Governance from Egypt

Draft Paper By

Iman Bibars

23-24 February 2004

Beirut, Lebanon

Outline

Outline

I. Introduction

II. The Problem Statement

III. The Stakeholder: Friends of the Environment Association

IV. The Case Study: Friends of the Environment Association (FEA) vs. Governor of Alexandria and the World Health Organization

V. Embodying the principals of good governance

VI. Transcending a Single Case

I.Introduction

The Friends of the Environment Association (FEA) is a registered NGO (#1151) that was founded in 1990 and is committed to protecting, maintaining, and improving the natural and built environment in the governorate of Alexandria. Working within a tightly controlled socio-political environment, FEA is one of the few organizations to effectively use existing laws to exert pressure and promote change within the government itself. FEA's work to promote citizens' rights and environmental protection is a rare case in applying governance, demanding transparency, and requiring accountability.

FEA's projects assume a two-pronged approach—environmental advocacy and political reform. Adel Abu Zahra, Chairperson and Founder of FEA, and the members of FEA work to promote and heighten the principals of good governance both internally and externally. Their micro practice provides a model for larger organizations and embodies the standards it advocates to both civic society and governmental bodies.

Good governance embraces the ideas and practice of distributing power and managing public and natural resources for the benefit of the whole society. These are premises on which Adel and FEA base their philosophy. They believe that public resources such as air, water, the built environment are owned by the public and thus the people should have a say on how they are managed. Such good governance, according to the FEA, carries with it a powerful idea of democratic rule which relies on transparency, accountability and public participation. They believe that people must participate and influence decisions that may affect their quality of life, both environmentally and socially.

The FEA was the first NGO nationwide to resort to courts, contending against high officials, in order to freeze the resolutions they opposed, which would have led to the deterioration of the ecosystems and the built environment, and to the disposition of public funds dedicated to the public interest utilities, in a manner that would infringe upon the law. Ultimately, FEA, through its work fighting for the people's environmental rights, has set precedence in Egypt for what good governance is and should be.

This case study focuses on the problems from which FEA's advocacy work stems, their approach, and the overall outcomes of their campaigns, specifically focusing on their first case which challenged the Governor of Alexandria and the World Health Organization (WHO). Ultimately, the case study analyzes the socio-political context in which the FEA works and seeks to evaluate its mission, goals and strategies in relation to the establishment of good governance models. Furthermore, it sets forth the premises on which good governance can be and are practiced in the Egyptian context and attempts to promote the implementation of similar practices on both micro and macro levels.

II. The Problem Statement

It is important to note here that FEA addresses two main problems with their work and different activities. First and foremost they address the deterioration of the environmental conditions in Alexandria, which started in the mid seventies, and also aim to tackle the lack of interest and the amount of ignorance of the public at large with regard to these growing environmental hazards. Secondly, and as important, FEA was addressing the absence of a citizenship rights-based culture and environment, not only in Alexandria but in Egypt as a whole. FEA's use of environmental rights as a means to promote participation and citizenship rights and their own ability to uphold the principals of good governance, not only vis a vis the state, but also within their own NGO, establishes a model of good governance in Egypt.

The Environmental Situation

Alexandria is the second most important city in Egypt after Cairo. It is the first harbor, the first summer resort for the Egyptians and the second most important industrial center in Egypt. Alexandria has a population of nearly four million inhabitants and contains 37% of the industry in Egypt.

Until the 1960s Alexandria was the cleanest city in Egypt and European architecture prevailed as the predominant style. However, in the 1970s and with the new open door policy and an influx of rural immigrants to major cities, many illegal settlements were built in Alexandria and the distinctions between residential areas and industrial areas became blurred with the increase of factories and industrial waste. In addition, a sudden and high increase in population put a huge burden on the basic services, including garbage collection. Large dumps of garbage and sewage became concentrated in the lower income areas. Furthermore, due to corruption and carelessness, much of the traditional architecture was destroyed and many of the old and historical villas were torn down and replaced with high rises and modern buildings. Thus the historical and European style of Alexandria was compromised.

As a result of the unmonitored mushrooming of industries, the city now produces 260 tons of industrial waste daily, which is thrown or dumped, without treatment, in the Mediterranean, MarriottLake, the potable water sources, and irrigation canals, jeopardizing and polluting agriculture and drinking water. Additionally, the city also produces more than one million cubic meters of waste. The irrigation water, that later drains into the canals and the sea, is full of insecticides and chemicals that are used by farmers on Alexandria’s 200 feddans of agricultural land. The FEA found that all water sources in Alexandria are polluted by heavy metals, chemical and industrials waste, and that the level of oxygen in the natural after source is very low.

With more than a half million cars and the lack of exhaust regulations and regular check-ups, Alexandria suffers from high levels of air pollution. The problem is compounded by the burning of garbage and the exhaust that is continuously released by large factories and industries. To perpetuate the amount of pollution, Alexandria's citizens also dispose of nearly 3,000 tonnes of garbage daily. Despite the cities efforts to contract foreign companies to help them dispose of and reduce garbage, Alexandria continues to face a number of health and environmental hazard pertaining to the disposal of waste.

The lack of appropriate disposal methods and space force the city to find alternative dumping grounds. Thus, industrial waste and excess tonnes of garbage find their way to outlying areas of the city, into the urban slums. Thirty five percent of Alexandria's population lives in 57 different illegal settlements with no access to basic services. These people not only suffer from the environmental hazards, but a total lack of resources from which to escape, both economical and informational.

Perhaps even more dangerous than the actual environmental hazards is the complete lack of awareness regarding the environmental conditions. Relevant and regular data about the environmental status and information regarding the management of the natural and environmental resources is not accessible to the general public. Furthermore, even if the information exists, very little environmental legislation is actually implemented and even fewer regulations are actively enforced. Moreover, no monitoring mechanism or systems exist in order to hold the state and its institutions responsible and accountable for any violations or cases of mismanagement.

The concept of environmental rights is still not clear or understood within the Egyptian society. Egyptian people lack self-awareness and understanding for embracing and understanding environment protection issues. People still associate environmental rights with pollution, but the issue is not pollution per se, but control over resources and how these resources are being utilized. Due to prevailing poverty in the country, people perceive environmental concerns as a luxury, and they cannot relate those issues to satisfaction of their basic needs, such as food and shelter. People, especially those in the lower classes, tend to think short term and do not realize the consequences and damages of irresponsible national policies, which sooner or later will affect their very life or the lives of their children.

In order for people to participate effectively in managing their natural resources, three factors have to be present; first, data and information about the conditions of the environment must be available through a mechanism that regulates and produces reliable data. Secondly, ordinary people and NGOs must have easy access to such information. Thirdly, until such a mechanism is created, there must be a way to get this information when requested without any obstacles. In Egypt all these factors are absent—first people are unaware of the existing environmental hazards and do not realize that they have the right to know. Secondly, there is no mechanism or system that provides such information automatically upon request.

Ultimately, Alexandria's large population influx and the increase in industrial and economic activity have placed a large environmental burden on both the city and its infrastructure. The inability and lack of capacity to handle the growth has initiated alternative methods of disposal that jeopardize the quality of life for all citizens in Alexandria, especially the poorest and most vulnerable groups. These environmental hazards are compounded by a general ignorance regarding environmental rights and an overall lack of resources and understanding of how to defend those rights.

Political Context

During the past twenty years, Egypt has made progress in some aspects of its economic and social fronts. The country has strengthened its macroeconomic discipline, privatized many public sector investments, made substantial infrastructure investments, and increased its awareness and initiated some actions to address environmental concerns. On the political front in Egypt, political development – defined in terms of prevalence of transparency, accountability, participation, free and fair elections, rule of law, and respect for rights – has lagged behind both in terms of pace and scope, and quality. This lag in political development has not only resulted in less than optimal distribution of these benefits, but also has compromised the welfare of Egyptians in terms of enjoying equal and inalienable human rights. Accordingly, for the human rights situation to be improved in Egypt, the legal, policy and regulatory environment have to be improved. In addition, the public has to be well informed, viewing itself as having both the civic responsibility and the means to exercise their rights and protect them.

Starting from the 1952 Revolution, Egypt has been a country with a political system that falls in an area between a parliamentary system, such as that in the UK, and a presidential one, such as that in the USA. Today, the President of the Republic of Egypt is also the Head of State and assumes an important role in the executive authority. The President is normally assisted by presidential consultants of different specialties. The Cabinet is the major agent for executive action and is headed by a Prime Minister and composed of Ministers from different fields. The People Assembly (i.e. the Parliament) is elected every four years and assumes the responsibility of legislation and control. In 1979, another council - the Shoura - was created, and is composed mainly of experts in different fields. Its activities are similar to those of the Peoples Assembly but it acts as a political consultative body.

The People's Assembly is overwhelmingly controlled by an 87.8% majority of the National Democratic Party (NDP). The NDP has remained the ruling party with little opposition. While, emerging as the major opposition party, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) has failed to pose a significant challenge to the NDP considering they are not a legal political party. Legally recognized opposition parties in Egypt only amount to 16, none of which have shaken the foundation upon which the NDP has succeeded.

At the local level, governors are appointed by the President, while districts are headed by an appointed chief and an executive council with representatives from various ministries. The district council executes consultative functions and may include committees for specific activities. Since 1976, Egypt has had a multi-party system with a number of political parties that, to date, espouse 16 different ideologies. A liberalized press and a growing number of NGOs and interest groups are other factors supporting democracy.

Egypt's political situation is characterized by the State of Emergency that has been imposed, almost without interruption, since 1981. The justification of Emergency Law and a police state is based in the argument that this enables the control of terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. Simultaneously, however, Emergency Law also exerts considerable pressure and control on the citizens and civil society, restricting freedom of speech, political participation, freedom of association, and overall choice. Moreover, the so-called democratic state is undermined by the fact that President Mubarak, who has been in power since 1981, was elected to a fifth six-year term in November 2001 with the practical unanimity of the People's Assembly, endorsed by a referendum of around 98% "yes" votes. Mubarak holds extensive constitutional powers that outweigh those of the other branches of legislature and the judiciary.

Military presence has contributed to the concentrated and centralized political structure in Egypt. As an acting guarantor of the state, the Armed forces possess extensive power that has determined their major role in the implementation of economic and social development plans. Additionally, within the framework of the political process, the military also exerts it weight in the decision-making processes, implementation of legislation and controls over Trade Unions and civil society. Under Emergency Law, their responsibilities and influence are extended.

Despite forms of both social and political repression, there have been some positive actions from the state. On June 20, 2003, the Egyptian parliament passed laws which eliminated hard labor as a sentence, abolished state security courts, and established a national council for human rights. Nonetheless, juxtaposing Egypt's current political situation and the characteristics of good governance reveals a large gap. Governance establishes rules of political conduct and involves creative intervention by political actors to change structures that inhibit the expression of human potential. Governance, which cannot thrive under a centralized governmental power structure, is a concept that implies dialogue and emphasizes the nature of interactions between the state and social actors and among social actors themselves.

Thus for civil society, for whom governmental transparency and accountability is important, the question of good governance is increasingly pertinent and urgent. Restrictions on associations and a tight control over NGO activities have made it difficult for individuals to unite. The NGO Law 84/2002 requires NGOs to seek approval from the Ministry of Social Affairs for all projects in affiliation to international organizations and foreign financial support. Moreover, it prohibits NGOs from "practicing any political or syndicalism activity." Many of these violations are loosely defined, thus neglecting to establish a precedent and leaving many cases up to the independent decision of either military or presidential personnel.

Currently, civil society in Egypt is characterized by a dormancy in which people do not exercise their citizenship rights, nor are they encouraged to do so. In many cases they are unaware of their rights, lack the skills and confidence to stand up for what they believe in and in other cases are ignorant of or misinformed about violations of their rights.

Many Egyptians do not know that they have rights protected by law. Many do not have the skills or tools to speak up. They don’t have access to the courts and the legal mechanisms that exist to insure their protection. But at a more fundamental level, the Egyptian public is passive rather than assertive—it’s a mindset quality made more pronounced by the efforts of development groups that aim to protect people without really involving them. Many development efforts posit citizens, and especially poor citizens, as the beneficiaries of protections, rather than the initiators. While some impact measures would suggest that the result amounts to the same thing (citizens get protected, or not), the outcome in terms of people, their tools, and their understanding of citizenship is entirely different. In the former situation, people are left with, say, a cleaner environment and guarantees against air pollution; in the latter, they are left with a cleaner environment, the same guarantees, plus the attitude and tools they need to push forward with other important protections.