EACSOF Strategy Review Meeting
By Kenya Chapter
Held On
16th – 17th October, 2014
At Pride Inn Hotel,
Nairobi, Kenya
Contents
Background 4
Welcome Remarks and Introductions 4
Does EACSOF work to serve CSOs, the citizenry or both? 6
Reviewing Current Status, Achievements and Challenges 7
Achievements 7
Challenges 7
Strategies/Actions by EACSOF Kenya that have Worked 8
Lessons Learnt from strategies that have Not-Worked Effectively 8
SWOT ANALYSIS OF EACSOF 9
SWOT Analysis of Gender 9
Strengths 9
Weaknesses 9
Opportunities 9
SWOT Analysis of EACSOF 9
Strengths 9
Weaknesses 10
Opportunities 10
Threats 10
PESTEL Analysis 11
Political Trends 11
Economic Trends 11
Social Trends 12
Legal Trends 12
Technological Trends 12
Environmental Trends 12
Membership 12
Plenary 13
The proposed focus for EACSOF 14
Strategic objectives 15
Approaches and Strategies 15
At the regional level: 15
Strategic Objectives 16
Approaches and strategies 16
Comments 16
PROPOSED STRUCTURES FOR EACSOF KENYA 18
National Structure 18
Group 1 18
Group 2 19
Proposed regional structure 20
Group 1 20
Group 2 21
Comments 21
Resource Mobilization Strategies 22
Communication Strategies 23
Annex 1: Program 24
Annex 2: Participants List 25
Background
The East African Civil Society Organizations’ Forum (EACSOF) is an autonomous umbrella body of Non-governmental Organisations and Civil Society Organisations in East Africa. EACSOF works to build a critical mass of knowledgeable and empowered civil society in the East Africa region in order to foster their confidence and capacity in articulating grassroots needs and interests in the East African Integration process. EACSOF also works to strengthen the institutionalizing of relationships between East African CSO’s and the EAC through an annual general meeting for members of EACSOF. It also works to ensure that citizens of East Africa and their organisations work together to play a more effective role in the integration process through building stronger citizen organisations that respond to citizens needs and hold duty bearers to account.
To provide an opportunity for Kenya Chapter EACSOF to review the national and regional operating context and mandate of EACSOF in order to enable its members to agreed on the best strategic position and strategies that would enable EACSOF realize its mandate. The participants were able to briefly cover EACSOF’s context analysis (social, economic, political and cultural contexts) and to appreciate the implications at the country and regional levels of the various emerging issues. The participants also reviewed and articulated EACSOF’s theory of change, its organizing framework and the strategies that exists and agreed on what should be carried forward in its second strategic plan. The meeting was facilitated by Rose Wanjiru, the chief executive officer of Centre for Economic Governance.
Welcome Remarks and Introductions
Janet Munywoki of Legal Resources foundation gave the opening remarks. She spoke on the significance of strategic reflection as it presented an opportunity to reflect on where we are coming from, to look at opportunities as well as develop a clear roadmap ahead. She emphasised that it was a critical moment for the regional EACSOF as well as national chapters to identify their own emerging issues and get insight from both levels on the direction where they should move the EACSOF agenda. Ideally it was a moment where they would be looking at working beyond their individual States in terms of enhancing regional integration among (citizens and CSOs) and also enhancing integration from the perspective of the coordinating team and governing council. She emphasized that strategic plans had to be workable, realistic and able to moot the intended action which was to enhance citizen participation in the integration process.
Dr. Martin Mwondha, the chief executive officer of the EACSOF said that the strategic review was key to find the few but major focus areas of engagement for EACSOF. He alluded to Article 127 (4) of the EAC Treaty that provided for consultation between the private sector, CSO’s, other interest groups and appropriate institutions of the community. He inquired as to how members of EACSOF were taking full advantage of the EAC treaty to enhance citizen participation. He gave a brief history of the formation of EACSOF; the 1st meeting of CSOs in the EAC having been held in 2005, convened by the EAC itself but from 2007 EACSOF was officially founded as an all-inclusive platform for all CSOs.
Dr. Mwondha highlighted the Vision and Mission of EACSOF. The Vision is to see an East Africa in which citizens are fully engaged and involved in all affairs affecting their lives and providing platforms for debate and dialogue. He asked the participants whether they represented citizens’ voices or brought out citizens to have their voices heard so that it was not the members’ voices being heard on their behalf. Martin stated that it would be important to review and clarify the primary objective and vision. He said that EACSOF envisioned a future built on self-determination of and by citizens in all spheres of their lives, that is, political, economic, social capital.
He revisited some of EACSOFs current specific objectives such as demanding for the execution of existing policies by the partner states which were not being implemented effectively. He explained that some of the EAC Partner States activites contradicted the EAC Treaty, policies and laws such as the free movement of people, goods and labour which were clearly stated in the treaty and protocols.
Dr. Mwondha spoke on the importance of participating in the formulation of new policies; and specifically how members were bringing the civil society’s perspective in that process. He mentioned that EACSOF recently got a draft bill from the speaker of EALA -The East African Cooperative Societies Bill, which was an opportunity for CSO’s to look at the Bill and provide input and send feedback to EALA. They said the bill had been circulated to the national focal points.
He also listed the policy engagement thematic areas as follows: democracy and good governance, peace and security, social and economic justice, environment and science and technology. He rhetorically asked whether they should be reviewed or new ones added.
He highlighted the collective action points as follows:
· Constitutionalism(Democracy and Governance)
· Integrity. He cited movements like Black Monday Movement known for fighting corruption in Uganda. Members thought it could be replicated in other countries to build a culture of integrity.
· Economic rights
· Free movement of goods, labour and services.
· Social cohesion. He asked the members to reflect on how we were integrating as citizens outside the purview of the states and treaties. For example, musicians from partner states were gaining acceptance in other EAC member countries and performing across borders.
· Global integration- Were we getting the grassroots perspective into the global discussion such as the post 2015 Millennium Development Goals agenda?
· Monitoring the impact of EAC policies
· Mitigation of harmful short term effects of integration. For example, complaints by business persons in Uganda and Rwanda concerning the loss of business through the single customs territory whereby goods are cleared in Dar salaam and Mombasa.
· Strengthening the capacity of members through cross-learning and sharing information.
Does EACSOF work to serve CSOs, the citizenry or both?
There was a critical discussion on the EACSOF theory of change: The facilitator presented a figure that indicated the theory of change as articulated in the current strategic plan. The theory of change indicated that EACSOF’s mandate was to build a critical mass of a knowledgeable and empowered civil society in the region, and that the strengthened CSOs would represent people’s voice and ensure that the grassroots needs and interests were articulated and integrated in the EAC integration process. It was noted that the civil society did not exist to serve their own interests but to articulate the needs of the citizenry. The facilitator then posed the following questions to the members: When the civil society engaged at EAC forums do they articulate the needs of the people-particularly the grassroots? And in the process of CSOs coming together under the EACSOF, have we strengthened our own capacity? In the process, have citizens issues been institutionalized in the EAC integration process? She indicated that there had not been indication of programmes or even resources that have been targeted towards capacity building of CSOs which seems to be the biggest mandate of EACSOF as articulated in the Strategic Plan.
Janet Munywoki, a representative of the Governing Council said that the theory of change as articulated in the current strategy was that EACSOF role was to build the capacity of the CSOs to speak on behalf of the citizenry. This was based on the reality that the structure of the EAC integration process was around high level/ policy level discussions, seldom where you would have participation from the ordinary citizen. It was further stated that since EACSOF had both the regional and local chapters, it could be decided what issues would be dealt with at the regional level and at the national chapters. For instance, if it was the articulation of the citizen’s needs and interests, it could be dealt with by the national chapters. The regional chapter could deal with matters of integrating the policy and advocacy issues around the EAC. That is, advocating for rights but at the regional level based on the issues emanating from the national chapters.
Martin opined that the theory of change could be altered such that the next step after the building of a critical mass should be having strong organizations which in turn articulate the needs and interests of the grassroots. That is assuming the main work starts at the CSO level rather than at the community level. He further stated that EACSOF should discuss approaches of how to advance the outcomes and impact of their work in areas such as citizens accessing benefits from the integration process to make the theory of change more complete.
Reviewing Current Status, Achievements and Challenges
A reflection was done by the participants to articulate what strategies had worked well and why they had worked well, as well as what strategies had not worked well and why they did not work well in the current strategic phase. The exercise revealed that few achievements in terms of policy advocacy could be attributed to EACSOF as a platform. However, a few EACSOF members have achieved certain goals which they used the EACSOF links and connection to the EAC and therefore attributed their success to EACSOF. A number of achievements and challenges that had been experienced since the establishment of the EACSOF in 2006 as articulated by the participants is listed below.
Strategies/Actions by EACSOF Kenya that have Worked
The members listed the following strategies as having been realized since the establishment of EACSOF in 2006 and the launch of the Strategic Plan 2010-2015 in April 2010:
· The approval of the Consultative Dialogue Framework (CDF) at the end of 2012 as a tool for the engagement of civil society organisations in the EAC process.
· The election of EACSOF by stakeholders to represent CSOs in the EAC through the consultative dialogue framework.
· The official registering of EACSOF Kenya Chapter as legal entity in 2014.
· Existence of a strong civil society.
· The Africa Youth Trust, one of EACSOF members spearheaded the creation of the East Africa Youth policy which contributed substantial portion of the contents of the Draft East Africa Youth Charter on Human Rights and good Governance and they are currently one of the members of the steering committee on Youth issues.
· Linkages with international bodies.
· Having a number of donor partners who contribute funds to develop EACSOFs activities such as meetings and processes. Currently the Kenyan Chapter had only dealt with one partner so far in regards to funding (Trade Mark East Africa).
· The establishment of national chapters. The Kenyan chapter was so far the only national chapter that had been officially registered. It presented the best practice to the region.
· Quarterly meetings organized by the Secretariat that had brought members of the various national chapters together provided a chance to revisit the EACSOF mission, reflect on activities and exchange information on successes that the local chapters had been engaged in.
Lessons Learnt from strategies that have Worked
· There was great potential amongst East Africans as civil society and as a people.
· Information flow from the national chapter to the regional chapter especially since the office of the national coordinator was duly constituted. However there is room for improvement.
· EACSOF was an all inclusive platform thus its neutrality attracted members from different thematic areas.
Strategies/Actions by EACSOF Kenya that have Not Worked
The following were pointed out as challenges of the 2010-2015 strategic period:
· Lack of unity and continued interaction between the regional CSOs members.
· Non-Involvement in policy formulation at the national and regional levels, such as between the civil society and the respective Ministry of East African Community Affairs
· Slow achievements of strategies
· No clarity of mission among members of EACSOF. It was stated that the members could be responding to funding and thus being derailed from EACSOF’s preset missions and agendas.
· Potential members needed to be told about the value addition by EACSOF (new and old) and vice versa.
· Lack/ insufficient sharing of information from the national chapters to the regional secretariat .
· Lack of CSO strengthening in terms of funding and lack of trainings.
· Thematic advocacy groups were not working well.
· Low and slow outreach to grass root and mainstream civil society organizations.
Lessons Learnt from strategies that have Not-Worked Effectively
· There was insufficient or a total lack of funding to effectively roll out EACSOF’s programs.
· The issue of the ownership of EACSOF by members in terms of the mission, principles and the organizational structure needed to be clarified.
· Negative politics needed to be managed at the Governing Council level as it would derail the mission