The issue of how to make a durable Constitution has once again become a major discussion among civil society and policy makers in Zambia. On 18th April, 2013, the Technical Committee Drafting the Zambian Constitution National Constitutional Convention (NCC) concluded its validation process on the 1st draft Constitution with a call for the holding of a referendum within 12 months. This process was held under the guidance of the Technical Committee Drafting the new Zambian Constitution (TCDZC).

Since independence, Zambia has had no enduring constitution partly due to lack of legitimacy, as a result of adoption methods, as past constitutions have been imposed on the people by previous rulers and the people at large have had nothing to do with the adoption of these documents, which have remained unfamiliar objects and far from resonating with the hopes and aspirations of the average Zambian. Outsiders may wonder why Zambia has continued to fail to enact an enduring constitution and why past and successive governments continue to delay the process in as much as the people of Zambia have longed for a document that will contribute to the development of systems, procedures and practices of good governance, a constitution that will not only regulate the framework of state institutions, people’s rights and liberties but ultimately shape how power is utilized and distributed in a democracy-through transparency and accountability.

The simplest answer to this question would be that there is an imbalance in the popular control over decision making in Zambia.

The relationship between policy makers and the electorate is highly unequal and one sided, it is controlled by an elite monopoly of the few, who unfortunately have also taken advantage of the cultural concept that elders or those in authority know best and thus it is against cultural norms to question those in authority or in this case leadership positions.  In Zambia, today the President can fire Senior Ministers for copying correspondence to him with Permanent Secretaries.

So what is civil society doing to help the situation?  

Zambia is blessed to have an active and vibrant civil society that has been given the space to maneuver and influence decision making; however, the current crop of leadership in civil society faces a number of challenges which include a lack of transparency and accountability, lack of capacity to lobby and advocate government and misguided direction in engaging the Executive or the legislative in a constructive manner. This coupled with the challenge of getting the voices of the individual Zambians to boldly demand for transparency and accountability in governance has greatly contributed to the erratic pace of Zambia’s democratic process.

The challenges that have faced civil society have been brought about by internal weaknesses leading to civil society being cautious on how much transparency it should demand from government as they too face a similar challenge. Government is not in a hurry to meet civil society demands on more openness as it appears to be comfortable to play to the gallery of the media on steps being undertaken towards greater transparency, while hindering the space for civil society through the implementation of the NGO Act, a piece of legislation that is a tool of political intimidation and only a handful of organizations can stand firm against any forms of intimidation.

The fact remains that past and successive governments will continue to be hesitant in giving in to demands of greater transparency from civil society or hurry to enact a Constitution that promotes the same because it is aware that civil society cannot afford to look itself in the mirror. What the Zambian government will do is continue to delay the process until such a time that it feels that it has safely sailed the storm and safeguarded its interests against those of the Zambian people and cooperating partners at large. The government will continue to take advantage of opportunities that will see a divided civil society and will stop at nothing to see increased mistrust amongst civil society and deter them from advocating for the enactment of people driven constitution. Sadly, the average Zambian citizen will remain continuously misguided and lacking information to demand for transparency and accountability from both civil society and government.  

Civil society needs to be able to read between the lines and quickly begin to go through an internal revival; with the new leaders taking bold steps to clean up house otherwise it will be meaningless to call on government to be open and transparent. In order to promote and strengthen democratic governance in Zambia, civil society must put in place measures that will first address internal accountability, deter the misapplication of donor funds, breaches of policy and lack of separation of powers between respective boards and their technocrats. Civil society must be seen to be walking the talk as this will enhance organizational credibility and legitimacy and at the same time it will encourage any successive government to take a leaf. Greater transparency and accountability will go a long way to equalize an unequal relationship between policy makers and the electorate which has given rise to weak institutions, low popular participation, poor accountable and transparency in governance and a non responsive government.

If Zambia is to address these challenges, there is an urgent need to conclude this constitutional making process, there is need for the active participation of the people in the debate and dialogue of the making and finalization of the Zambian Constitution and the people must begin to participate and get their voices heard. Once this is done, it will not only become easy for the country to build an inclusive democracy that values the separation of powers and the rule of law while at the same time the upholding of justice will be strengthened with elected leaders wanting to embrace accountability and shifting this accountability away from party interests to the people, and the standards of living for Zambians likely to improve.

Zambia 123.jpg

On September 25-27, 2013, approximately 150 representatives from key stakeholders groups-government, civil society, media, private sector, academia, donors and regional and international organizations met in Lusaka, Zambia to reflect on the domestication of the African Platform on Access to Information (APAI) and to leverage regional developments to enhance the enactment of Access to Information laws in African countries. The meeting also highlighted Zambia’s journey to enact its proposed Freedom of Information Bill and provide Zambians an opportunity to reflect on the multi-sect oral application of access to information.   

For me, it was a conference worth attending especially since Zambia has been grappling with enacting ATI legislation for 20 years now, undecided on whether or not to enact this legislation.  It is not clear what the basis of this indecision is, but regardless one can simply state that every government that has come and gone  has been fearful of  functioning in an open society,  reluctant to deter corruption  and allow for even the basic  of information being made available to common citizens to promote popular participation of its citizens and this has resulted in the creation of a governance environment that  remains  highly closed and  supported by a well- functioning  legal framework that was designed to promote  a closed society and maintain  effective checks and balances on any process  that seeks to promote politics of transparency, accountability, inclusion and diversity.  Socially and culturally, the country is faced with a number of emerging issues, for example,  women living with HIV, sex workers and LGBT individuals remain excluded from HIV information, education, communication and treatment  and once again, the  legal framework and the social attitude is very effective in creating an enabling and discriminatory environment.

The root cause of our country’s problems stem from our legal framework: a constitution that has failed to promote equity, tolerance, social accountability, transparency, accountability and one that discourages any participation of the majority of the people in determining how they want to be governed.  Yes, there is no right way of achieving democracy as democracy is a process but there should be a starting pointing that should allow societies to move towards one goal and direction. I have heard many say Africa needs to develop its own idea and meaning of development and not be driven by western agendas; this is so true and that is why Zambia needs to have an honest discussion as to what we want democracy to achieve for Zambia.  I strongly believe that democracy must grow from within, but for it to grow from  within, we as a society must agree on want we want to achieve from it as this is a key step in us moving forward to avoid confrontations on adapting our legal framework to suit the needs of our people.   It is about creating consensus on a starting point while taking into consideration the supply and demand side of democracy.  There is need for an honest discussion on what basic minimum provisions should be put in place to attain our common goal.

I am happy that the Patriotic Front Government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has expressed interest in being part of the Open Government Partnership multi-stakeholder process and that the current Minister of Information and Broadcasting, in his ministerial statement to Parliament on October 4th 2013 stated the PF government had agreed in principal to enact that ATI Bill and eluded to the fact that openness would build trust amongst government and citizens. However, I am still skeptical especially since Honorable Kapeya is accountable to the President of the Republic of Zambia and will act and respond to any pressure in the interest of the President, but at least a statement was made and it is now up to civil society and other actors to develop innovative ideas to drive the change that is needed.  I am also glad that the PF government has moved forward to revising the National Decentralization Policy 2013 but I do see a problem in the rational of the policy in that it does posses a challenge in itself to the citizenry in that citizens will only be able to exercise control over local affairs once the ATI bill is enacted.  Democratic accountability will not be strengthened by the review and implementation of developmental plans alone but through the creation of an inclusive democratic culture, open society and responsive government.  In order to enhance community participation both civil society and government need to promote community participation by first addressing  the  issues of indifference to matters of local governance and jointly work together to inculcate an inclusive society and  move away from this ruthless and intolerant  governance environment.  In addition, we the people must stop being indifferent to matters of governance and begin to meet our civic obligations. 

I look forward to seeing civil society step up to the plate and enhance organizational credibility and legitimacy and embrace the fact that they too must be open to scrutiny. We must have an honest discussion as to what we want to achieve from Democracy and stop hiding behind tradition and religion. We need to promote a society that is tolerant and inclusive for all. 

Photo credit: Dirt Road Zambia by Geof Wilson via Flickr

In 2011, South Africa joined 7 other countries to found the Open Government Partnership (OGP). Since then, it has been joined by Ghana, Liberia, Kenya, Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Malawi and most recently, Tunisia as African countries participating in the OGP. For each of these countries, the motivation for joining the partnership was a desire to make their governments more accountable and responsive to their citizens.

The initial enthusiasm with which countries sought to use the OGP to advance open government reform in their countries seems to have waned, however. A worrying trend towards the closing of civic spaces in many African countries has been observed. In some countries reports are beginning to emerge alleging increasingly attempts by government to muzzle civil society and media in their countries through the passage of oppressive laws, regulations, and policies. The growing terrorist activities and threats of terrorist groups such as Boko Haram in West Africa and Al-Shabaab in East Africa presents another cause for concern for African states. The violence perpetrated by these groups has served to switch the narrative of governance in African states from democracy and openness to increased surveillance and homeland security. The pace of political change and growth; only a few years bursting with a thirst for openness and inclusivity; has become slow and in some countries the gear has been switched into reverse.

In 2015, however, the need to promote of transparent and accountable governance to address shared concerns in Africa is again set to take center stage.

Africa Map.jpg

Governance Issues on the Continent

Post 2015 Development Agenda

Debate on the construction of a global development framework and agenda beyond 2015 and the enduring calls to focus on open, inclusive, accountable and effective governance as a stand-alone goal of this agenda remains key in 2015. African OGP participating countries are already lending their voices to this discourse. The High Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post 2015 UN Development Agenda, upon which Liberia’s President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf sits as co-Chair; recommended the establishment of a specific goal to “ensure good governance and effective institutions” In September 2014, President John Mahama of Ghana co-hosted an event on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) meeting in New York, “Setting the Stage for the post-2015 era, Transparency, Good Governance and Effective Institutions as the basis for Success”, where he highlighted the significance of good governance and transparency, particularly to developing countries, since they needed every opportunity to improve both their infrastructure and economies.

Illicit Financial Flows

Linked to the development discourse on the continent are the challenges associated with the realization of the post 2015 development goals and those of the Africa specific Agenda 2063. Both these development agendas will guide African countries’ efforts to achieve inclusive growth and development for all. Yet, the 2015 report of the African Union Commission/United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (AUC/ECA) High Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows revealed that Africa loses USD 50 billion annually through illicit financial outflows with corruption playing a significant part in enabling these outflows. The report finds that, among other things, transparency is key to achieving success in the fight against IFFs and makes specific recommendations for States to address the broader structural issues that facilitate IFFs from the continent. Some of these recommendations include the establishment and strengthening of independent institutions and agencies of government responsible for preventing IFFs; and the institution of fiscal transparency measures. Effectively addressing IFFs will enable countries finance the implementation of components that will lead to the realization of their development goals.

Extractive Industries

Extractive industries; a key element in many African countries’ development agendas and economic strategies; will continue to attract the attention of governments, civil society, citizens and investors in 2015. With the continued discoveries of new resources on the continent, and some nearing commercial production, discourse on the legislative frameworks, regulatory structures, capacities and political will of African governments to effectively and transparently govern these industries for the benefit of their citizens will be ongoing. Alternative Mining Indaba meeting held in Cape Town, South Africa in February 2015 is testament to this. This meeting brought together various stakeholders from across the continent to discuss the social effects of mining and demand accountability, transparency and good governance to ensure that the benefits of natural resource mining are enjoyed by the people of Africa.

In 2015, the OGP again provides a useful platform and timely openings for African countries positioning themselves to begin to tackle these issues in an effective and concrete manner.

OGP Opportunities

Countries developing National Action Plans (NAPs)

Governments of OGP participating countries co-create a National Action Plan (NAP) with civil society covering a two-year period and consisting of a set of commitments that advance transparency, accountability, participation and/or technological innovation. In 2015, five of the eight African countries participating in the OGP are due to submit their NAPs addressing priority areas for governance reform in their countries (Kenya, SA, Malawi, Ghana, Liberia).

For civil society in these countries, this is a useful and timely opening to get a seat at the table, as equal partners with their government counterparts, to specifically identify areas in need of reform and develop concrete, ambitious commitments towards achieving these reforms. In Ghana, for example, the development of the second NAP is an opportunity to build on the progress made towards the passage of a Right to Information (RTI) law; to cover commitments and milestones for its passage; but beyond that, its operationalization and implementation. For countries developing their second NAP such as Kenya, South Africa, Liberia and Ghana; the NAP process allows civil society to push for the broadening of topics covered in NAP implementation and bringing into OGP discourse more actors such as independent accountability institutions, parliament and other CSOs. Again, civil society should be alive to this opportunity and leverage it effectively. Importantly, too, civil society in these countries should start to self-organize and strategize on how to work with the government to set up an ongoing mechanism for civil society to support and provide feedback on implementation of OGP commitments.

South Africa’s Leadership of the OGP

In October 2014, the government of South Africa, took up the position of co-chair on the OGP; a position it will hold until October 2015 when it will assume from Mexico the role of lead chair of the OGP.. South Africa has committed, as co-chair of the OGP in 2015, to use its leadership role to “facilitate greater collaboration between the OGP, regional governance structures, and the United Nations system” and “promote meaningful regional outreach programmes and dialogue that empowers governments, civil society and citizens” on the continent.

As co-chair, South Africa now also has the opportunity to take the lead in the development of an Africa agenda for OGP. The need for such an agenda – one that resonates more closely with, and supports the formulation and advancement of, reforms and initiatives geared towards achieving the development aspirations of African countries – has been expressed by South Africa and other African actors the last few years but has not become concrete yet.

Africa Regional Meeting

In 2015, Tanzania will host Africa’s second regional meeting on OGP. This meeting will bring together open government reform champions from all over the continent to share and learn from the OGP experiences of participating countries; present their NAPs; and explore opportunities for improved performance of OGP participating countries. Beyond the OGP participating countries, the meeting will target eligible[1] and near eligible[2] African countries pushing to join the OGP for support. In April 2015, the Civil Society Engagement (CSE) team will, with the support of OGP’s African civil society steering committee members, convene a pan-African conference call with lead CSOs that have been working on the OGP in the continent to discuss preparation for the meeting; and share updates on challenges, opportunities and strategies for civil society across the continent engaging on the OGP.

We are ready and committed to working with civil society on the continent to support effective engagement with the OGP processes in their countries in 2015, particularly with the development of their NAPs; and look forward to their robust participation at the Africa regional meeting.

[1] Angola, Cape Verde, Ethiopia, Namibia, Nigeria and Uganda
[2] Morocco, Mozambique, Guinea, Niger, Senegal and Zambia

Photo Credit: Free Grunge Textures - www.freestock.ca via Compfightcc

During President Barack Obama's visit to Kenya this weekend, he mentioned Open Government Partnership, calling it an 'institution' that helps to address human investment issues, accountability issues, and rule of law issues. The full transcript is below.

United Nations Compound
Nairobi, Kenya

10:40 A.M. EAT

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you so much. Please, please, everybody have a seat. Good morning!

AUDIENCE: Good morning!

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Tanga jumbo.

Thank you so much, President Kenyatta, for your timely remarks, your warm welcome, and the great work that has gone into hosting this summit. It is wonderful to be back in Kenya. (Applause.) Niaje wasee! (Applause.) Hawayuni! (Applause and laughter.) I’m proud to be the first U.S. President to visit Kenya. (Applause.) And Obama, this is personal for me. There’s a reason why my name is Barack Hussein Obama. (Applause.) My father came from these parts, and I have family and relatives here. And in my visits over the years, walking the streets of Nairobi, I’ve come to know the warmth and the spirit of the Kenyan people.

Now, what President Kenyatta and I really want to have is a conversation with our panel. And we've got some outstanding young people here today who I think represent the promise of entrepreneurship not only in Africa but around the world. But I do want to make just a few quick points.

We are joined today by inspiring entrepreneurs from more than 120 countries -- (applause) -- and many from across Africa. And all of you embody a spirit that we need to take on some of the biggest challenges that we face in the world -- the spirit of entrepreneurship, the idea that there are no limits to the human imagination; that ingenuity can overcome what is and create what needs to be.

And everywhere I go, across the United States and around the world, I hear from people, but especially young people, who are ready to start something of their own -- to lift up people’s lives and shape their own destinies. And that’s entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship creates new jobs and new businesses, new ways to deliver basic services, new ways of seeing the world -- it’s the spark of prosperity. It helps citizens stand up for their rights and push back against corruption. Entrepreneurship offers a positive alternative to the ideologies of violence and division that can all too often fill the void when young people don’t see a future for themselves.

Entrepreneurship means ownership and self-determination, as opposed to simply being dependent on somebody else for your livelihood and your future. Entrepreneurship brings down barriers between communities and cultures and builds bridges that help us take on common challenges together. Because one thing that entrepreneurs understand is, is that you don't have to look a certain way, or be of a certain faith, or have a certain last name in order to have a good idea.

The challenge is -- as so many of you know -- it’s very often hard to take those first steps. It’s hard to access capital. It’s hard sometimes to get the training and the skills to run a business as professionally as it needs to be in this competitive world. It’s hard to tap into the networks and mentors that can mean the difference between a venture taking off and one that falls flat.

And it’s even harder for women and young people and communities that have often been marginalized and denied access to opportunities. You run into old attitudes that say some people, because of where you come from or what you look like, don’t have what it takes to lead or create a business. And sometimes it's subtle. You go into pitch an idea and maybe the response you get might not be as enthusiastic as if someone else pitched the exact same idea. Sometimes women or folks from communities that historically have not been viewed as entrepreneurial may not have the means of opening those doors just to get in front of the right person.

Of course, the best answer to that kind of thinking is the example that all of you are setting -- your success. And that’s why I’ve made encouraging this spirit of entrepreneurship a key part of America’s engagement in the world. I launched the first of these summits in Washington five years ago. And since then, we’ve helped empower hundreds of thousands of entrepreneurs, giving them a boost to launch thousands of new businesses and initiatives. Here in Africa, our Young African Leaders Initiative is empowering tens of thousands of dynamic leaders not only in business, but also in government and civil society. Because one of the things that we have come to understand -- and this is particularly relevant to Africa -- is that in order to create successful entrepreneurs, the government also has a role in creating the transparency, and the rule of law, and the ease of doing business, and the anti-corruption agenda that creates a platform for people to succeed.

So this is our first Global Entrepreneurship Summit in sub-Saharan Africa. We wanted to come here. I wanted to be here because Africa is on the move. (Applause.) Africa is one of the fastest-growing regions of the world. People are being lifted out of poverty. Incomes are up. The middle class is growing. And young people like you are harnessing technology to change the way Africa is doing business, as President Kenyatta alluded to. And that creates incredible opportunities for Africans and for the world. It means more growth and trade that creates jobs in all our countries. It's good for all of us. This continent needs to be a future hub of global growth, not just African growth. (Applause.)

And the country that's hosting us today is setting an important example -- Kenya is leading the way. (Applause.) Today, Kenya is the largest economy in East Africa. High-speed broadband and mobile connectivity are on the rise, unleashing the entrepreneurial spirit of even more Kenyans. Every day around the world, millions of people send and save money with M-Pesa -- and it's a great idea that started here in Kenya. (Applause.)

From Zimbabwe to Bangladesh, citizens work to keep elections safe, using the crowdsourcing platform Ushahidi -- and that’s a great idea that started right here in Kenya. (Applause.) Here in Nairobi, startup incubators are nurturing new businesses every day -- maybe some of yours -- each with the potential to be the great next Kenyan innovation.

And the good news is that I’m not the only one who sees the promise of Africa. I’m joined on this trip by some leaders not just across my administration, but I'm also joined by 20 members of the United States Congress from both parties -- because supporting a strong partnership with Africa is something that unites Americans. (Applause.) We've got some incredible entrepreneurs and business leaders who are well-established from the United States who are with us. They see the promise, as well. And they’re putting their money where their mouth is.

So today, we’re taking the next steps to partner with you. First, we’re offering entrepreneurs more startup capital. At last year’s Entrepreneurship Summit, we set a goal of generating $1 billion in new investment for emerging entrepreneurs around the world, with half the money going to support women and young people. (Applause.) A few months ago, I challenged governments, companies, organizations and individuals to help us reach this target. Today, I am proud to announce that not only did we make our goal, we surpassed it. (Applause.) We’ve secured more than $1 billion in new commitments from banks, foundations, philanthropists, all to support entrepreneurs like you.

Second, we’re connecting you with the world’s top business leaders and innovators. We hand-picked more than 200 seasoned investors and entrepreneurs and brought them to this summit. I’ve even brought a few of my presidential ambassadors for entrepreneurship. These are some of America’s leading innovators and entrepreneurs. So if you see them, don’t be shy. (Laughter.) Pin them down. Get their advice. Pitch them your idea. That’s why they’re here. And don't be discouraged if they say, I'm not sure that's going to work, and they ask you tough questions. Because one of the things every one of these successful entrepreneurs will tell you is that along with incredible successes, they’ve had some failures as well, and they’ve learned from them, but they haven't given up.

Number three, as I’ve said, we’re stepping it up to support women entrepreneurs. Women are powerhouse entrepreneurs. (Applause.) The research shows that when women entrepreneurs succeed, they drive economic growth and invest more back into their families and communities. (Applause.) We’ve already helped build a network of more than 1,600 women entrepreneurs across Africa. We’re launching three women’s entrepreneurial centers -- one in Zambia, one opening later this year here in Nairobi -- (applause) -- and I’m proud to announce that the third center will be located in Mali. (Applause.) We've got some folks from Mali in the house. (Laughter.)

And as part of that $1 billion that I mentioned earlier, the United States Overseas Private Investment Corporation is contributing $100 million to support Goldman Sachs’ 10,000 Women initiative, making more capital available to women-owned enterprises around the world. (Applause.) So, congratulations.

So as you leave here today, I want you all to know that I believe in you. I believe that you have the drive and the passion to change the world. You can unlock new solutions to the pressing global challenges that we face. I believe that. I believe that as you make these innovations, you’ll make life better for all of us. And I'm looking forward to being your partner in that process.

So with that, what I think we need to do is to hear from some of these young entrepreneurs themselves. They can tell us a little bit of what they’re doing -- because I think they’re great examples of all the talent that is here today.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

* * *

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think what’s also interesting is, as you listen to these three -- and I think that I'm sure this is true of many of the entrepreneurs here as well -- one of the advantages of this technological revolution that we're going through is that it can be tailored and adapted to different countries, different environments, different circumstances, in some cases enabling countries to leapfrog over old technologies, to individualize what’s done for a particular market or a particular need.

And the kind of thing that Jahiel is talking about -- the share economy concept -- we've got the founder of Airbnb out here, and you can talk to him a little bit. He’s doing pretty good. (Laughter.) But there’s a recognition that through these technological platforms, what might have previously required huge investments of capital, and as a consequence, big barriers to entry, now you can get a startup moving, and if it's the right idea, it can travel with the speed of how fast you can text. I can't text very fast, but -- (laughter) -- I notice Malia and Sasha, they -- (laughter.)

And so I think that this makes a place like Africa, or Croatia, or other countries that historically may not have been viewed as right at the center of the global economy, suddenly they can compete on a level playing field. And if you have a good idea in Zagreb or in Abuja, or wherever, now you potentially have access to a global marketplace in ways that you haven't had before.

What President Kenyatta said is absolutely correct, though, and that is for us to take full advantage of this we have to support programs like Judith’s so that our young people are being trained in this technology, that there are no barriers for girls to be trained in this technology. If half of your team is not playing, you’ve got a problem. And in too many countries, half of the team -- our women and girls -- are not participating enough in this.

So we've got to invest in human capital so that everyone has the opportunity to access this information and there’s got to be the framework for access to capital; reduce regulatory barriers; the ability to start up businesses effectively; making sure that governments are facilitating as opposed to being parasitic on entrepreneurial efforts -- that's our job. (Applause.)

And I think that the good news is, is that we're seeing that recognition in more and more governments around the world. Not all of them always are practicing what they preach, but it's a start when governments feel obliged through, for example, initiatives like the Open Government Partnership that we started through the United Nations -- where they feel obliged to acknowledge that they’ve got to get these rule of law issues and accountability issues and human investment issues right -- then that gives us a lever to start continually improving the environment for all of you and your operations.

And, last point I would make -- and President Kenyatta alluded to this -- I think it's very important for the business leaders who are here, the established business leaders, to understand that this is still a neglected market, and accessing capital for entrepreneurs here is still too hard. And we can help -- U.S. government policy can help -- but some of this is exposure and people having a vision of what’s possible.

When I was here in Nairobi 10 years ago, it looked very different than it does today. The incredible progress that's been made -- (applause) -- imagine what could happen if more and more of our global business leaders and global capital paid a visit and actually had a conversation, as opposed to just being blinded by some of the stereotypes that are so often promoted. This thing could move even faster. (Applause.) And that's part of the reason why this summit is so important.

So, I'm proud of all of you. I'm proud of these three entrepreneurs who are here. They represent all the talent that's in this room. Go out there and start something. We're excited about it. We expect great things out of you. (Applause.)

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

END
11:10 A.M. EAT

Image: By VoA News [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons 

The urgent imperative of tackling climate change is rarely associated with the dry science of budgeting and fiscal policy.  Yet this could dramatically change if the current climate negotiations in Paris that will conclude this week produce a groundbreaking deal.  Many sizeable countries, including China, India, Mexico and the US, made significant commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in advance of the talks.  National commitments are likely be matched by a further increase in financial resources to help poorer countries reduce emissions (mitigation) and tackle the adverse effects of climate change (adaptation) to reach $100 billion a year.  Comprising both public and private finance, this is equivalent to 75 percent of the $135 billion spent on official aid flows in 2014. 

Increasing funding for both adaptation and mitigation is crucial to tackling climate change and for promoting low-carbon, climate-resilient development.  Most of the focus so far has been on increasing the scale of climate finance.   However, scant attention has been placed on the effectiveness of this climate finance.  This is a massive oversight.  Mobilizing finance is arguably easier than ensuring that it addresses the challenges of the most vulnerable (who are often the least powerful politically), and supports the rapid transformation we need to see in energy, cities, agriculture and economic systems. 

Adaptation is the main focus of the less developed countries in the climate talks and they want to see a significant share of new climate finance allocated for this purpose.  Investments in adaptation are vital for protecting the livelihoods and resources of poor people in developing countries who are most at risk from the effects of climate change.  They enable countries to invest in climate proofing agriculture production, small-scale infrastructure to protect land from sea erosion and desertification, and support alternative income-earning opportunities for the poor. 

Channeling adaptation finance through public budgeting systems is clearly preferable than doing so through parallel mechanisms outside the budget.  But the increased availability of funds will only be effective in helping countries address climate change if the systems are in place to manage this huge flow of resources in a transparent and accountable manner.  Budget transparency and mechanisms to ensure citizens’ participation and oversight of climate funds are critical to this endeavor.  The risk is that large increase in financial flows will not be channeled through national budgeting systems and their allocation and impact will be hard to monitor. 

A big opportunity to tackle climate change in poorer countries could be squandered if the systems are not in place to manage, channel and monitor these financial flows well.  At worst, vulnerable people will not be able to adapt to the effects of climate change and suffer adverse consequences, as could the economies of these countries.  The absence of effective systems and reliable data creates opportunities for corruption through the deliberate misuse of funds.  And weak budgeting systems risk generating losses in efficiency through the misallocation of funds or failure to ensure that budget allocations are used for their intended purpose.

A related challenge lies in ensuring that a massive increase in spending on adaptation measures translates into sustainable investments on the ground.  Research by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and its partners under the Adaptation Finance Accountability Initiative highlights the paucity of data on budget allocations for climate adaptation.  Many developing countries lack systems to account for existing spend on adaptation, making it difficult to track investments in climate adaptation and monitor financial flows at the local level.  National budgeting systems are ill-equipped to perform this basic function. 

The lack of information on budget flows for adaptation makes it hard for citizens and independent monitoring groups to know whether funds are being used for their intended effect and reaching poor people.  In Zambia, for example, monitoring groups found that communities were not aware of the dam project planned in their locality as an adaptation investment until this broke ground.  They had not been consulted to determine what the best use of the funding should be to help them adapt to climate change.  In the end, the dam that was built caused major disruptions and relocation, and only benefited a very small share of the local population.  Lack of comparative data and information also makes it difficult to monitor budget allocations and spending for adaptation across countries.

However, there are now ways to address these challenges.  The effectiveness of public expenditures depends heavily on transparency, citizen participation and oversight mechanisms.  Independent data initiatives like the Open Budget Survey sponsored by the International Budget Partnership (IBP) can play a critical role in pursuing this goal.  Covering 102 countries, the 2015 Open Budget Survey (OBS) is the fifth round of a global assessment of budget transparency, public participation, and oversight institutions for national governments.   While 19 countries score well on budget transparency, the survey finds that a number of governments are backtracking on budget transparency commitments.  The 2015 survey results reveal that “the large majority of the world’s population does not have sufficient access to budget information.”  This finding is especially worrying for those countries in this grouping that are vulnerable to the effects of climate change and citizens in those countries that are unable to access information related to adaptation spending. 

Opportunities for public participation in the budget process also remain limited.  The OBS reports that “meaningful opportunities for the public to engage in the formal budget process simply do not exist in the vast majority of countries.”  This is consistent with the finding from WRI research in Nepal, Philippines and Uganda concerning the difficulty local NGOs face in accessing budget information on climate finance to enable them to track spending commitments on the ground. 

The third theme in the OBS relates to legislative oversight and the role of supreme audit institutions in providing oversight on the budget process.  The 2015 survey finds that only a third of countries surveyed actively engage their legislatures in the budget process.  Weaknesses were also observed in how far supreme audit institutions are able to scrutinize public funds in the majority of countries. 

The limitations identified in the OBS survey are a serious cause for concern as the Paris climate talks head to their conclusion with an expected hike in financial flows for poor countries to tackle climate change.  Efforts to improve budget transparency can help to improve the accountability of governments in the allocation and use of climate funds.  The climate change community needs to care deeply about open budgets.  Without this, increased funding will not bring about the positive impact we expect for poor people and less developed countries. 

Cote d’Ivoire and OGP

Shortly after the second OGP Global Summit in London, an official in Cote d’Ivoire called me to ask how his country could join OGP.  It was a daunting task to say the least.  At the time, Cote d’Ivoire scored a 2 of 12 on the OGP eligibility criteria.   However, his Prime Minister had just announced at the Summit that Cote d’Ivoire was making key institutional reforms and intended to become eligible for OGP as soon as possible.  A quick review indicated they would need to earn seven more points just to cross that threshold. 

I called over a French-speaking colleague to help translate our conversation.  Before we started, my colleague paused to confirm the vocabulary she was about to use as at the time, OGP had no participating governments where the primary language was French.  Although this task of becoming eligible for OGP seemed difficult to my colleague and I, the official sounded very optimistic about the timeline his Prime Minister had laid out.  He thanked us for the information and promised to send updates when he could. 

Over the past two years, Cote d’Ivoire has steadily introduced key governance reforms, including releasing the executive’s budget proposal and passing an access to information law.  This past year the government published an audit report for the first time. Before the OGP Summit in Mexico City, we reviewed Cote d’Ivoire’s eligibility on request and certified that they were eligible to join OGP.  Cote d’Ivoire has already submitted a letter of intent and initiated the development of their first action plan. 

Their example shows that any country can commit to join OGP as long as there is will to improve.  The eligibility criteria were designed to be clear and definitive steps that countries can take to begin to open up government.  When the Prime Minister spoke at the London Summit, he was able to list the steps his country needed to take as if it were a direct path from civil war to effective governance.  Those steps will help Cote d’Ivoire on the path not just of OGP, but to more broadly improve the trust Ivorians have in government.

Additional Updates

Six additional countries also became eligible to join OGP in 2016.  Afghanistan had the largest annual increase after they resumed publishing the audit report and passed an access to information law to earn five additional points.  Burkina Faso published their audit report for the first time and likewise passed an access to information law.  Rwanda published both of the relevant budget documents.  Zambia published their executive’s budget proposal.  Kazakhstan passed a access to information law.  Sri Lanka passed a new constitutional provision for access to information and like Cote d’Ivoire sent a letter of intent to join OGP.  We look forward to their first action plan in 2016. 

Three countries declined below the threshold for eligibility: Papua New Guinea, Tunisia and Venezuela.  Papua New Guinea and Tunisia are OGP participating countries and therefore have a year from January to improve their score.  Both countries did not publish an audit report in recent years and need to resume doing so or make other changes to regain points on the eligibility criteria. 

32 countries are eligible to participate in OGP but are yet to send a letter of intent to join.  The full list is on this page.  We’ve also opened an online spreadsheet with a complete dataset, including historical scores, here.  If the data for your country has changed in the last year you can contact the Support Unit directly to have those changes verified by emailing info@opengovpartnership.org 

This piece originally appeared in the World Bank Governance for Development blog. 

I have worked on public procurement and governance for most of my life. But I have never been more excited to finally have a solution at hand that has potential to change the legacy of opaqueness, fraud and lack of effectiveness in public contracting in many African countries.
 
Africa still need billions in investments to build infrastructure and provide quality services to its citizens, many of them vital: health care centers, food for school children, water services and road to help farmers market their produce. Investments as part of the Sustainable Development Goals in infrastructure alone carries a price tag nearly $100 billion a year. Unfortunately, like in many countries around the world, public contracting in Africa has been characterized by poor planning, corruption in picking contractors and suppliers and contracts are poorly managed.
 
But the good news is that this is changing. The series of blogs I’m kicking off will highlight the shifting of the norm towards open contracting in Africa.

Ghana and Zambia, among others, are committed to implementing open contracting reforms. African civil society is getting engaged across the region. A new working group hosted by the African Freedom of Information Centre with members from Kenya, Nigeria, and Uganda has been formed to promote open contracting as a solution to end corruption in government contracts across Africa.
 
Open contracting promises to change the dynamics of public contracting by moving the default of government contracting from opaqueness to openness. Open contracting is an approach that promotes publicly disclosure of timely information throughout the public procurement cycle, i.e., from planning to contract award (including the contracts) to payment and delivery.  Preferably, this information should be disclosed in open data, machine readable formats thus facilitating engagement and participation and engagement by business and citizens.
 
As examples of the emerging norm towards greater openness, the Africa Freedom of Information Center in Uganda is monitoring infrastructure at community levels. The Public Private Development Center in Nigeria has developed a web platform to monitor government spending. This platform, called Budeshi which means open it in Hausa, is tracking contracts for health centers and school construction. Kenya and Malawi are already considering adopting this platform.
 
The region’s politicians and civil society will meet in May at the Open Government Partnership Summit in Cape Town to discuss reform for more open government in Africa. Open contracting is one of the great ideas that will be on the table.
 
This is why I believe that a commitment to opening up government contracting in Africa is going to be a powerful towards ensuring that public expenditures will be spent better and deliver better results in the future.  Three quick points:

1. Corruption continues to hamper development and puts lives of millions at risk when vital services fail to materialize. For example, a recent inquiry into Uganda’s National Roads Authority discovered that billions were paid to non-existing firms and double payments were common. These problems are not new. In 2012 the Inspectorate of Government found that 99% of contracts overshot original budgets while the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority reported that two out of three contracts are not completed on time. A key use case for open contracting is the opportunity to shine a light on potential hotbeds of corruption like these. Where transparency shines, prosperity will grow.  
    
2. Open contracting makes sure everyone involved in public procurement, i.e., governments, business and citizens have the same information at hand to engage constructively in finding appropriate solutions to identified problems.
    
3. With open data at the core, government contracting information can be made actionable by developing tools to analyze and sift through contracts, improve access and notifications for companies who want to grow their business with government, and, finally, monitor that contractors deliver on what they are paid for.

 
Ultimately, the shifting of the norm towards open contracting will result in better projects and higher quality services for citizens of Africa.
 
I am delighted to kick off this series of blog posts of bright spots of open contracting in Africa that can help define the future for my continent. Stay tuned for these exciting open contracting stories from around the region.

The next generation of Africa’s development will require billions in investment to build infrastructure and provide quality services to its citizens such as health centers, food for school children, water, and roads to help farmers market their produce. Investments in African infrastructure alone to meet the Sustainable Development Goals carry a price tag of an estimated US$93 billion a year.

Government contracts with private companies will be vital to delivering on this promise of public benefit. Across Africa, on average half of government spending is on public contracts. Worldwide, public contracting adds up to US$9.5 trillion per year, equal to 15% of global GDP.

Public contracting is where the power and the money is. It comes as no surprise, then, that public contracting in Africa, like in many other places around the world, often suffers from poor planning and corruption. The OECD, European Commission, World Economic Forum and UN Office of Drugs and Crime all agree that public procurement and contracting is a government’s number one vulnerability for corruption and fraud. Costs are huge: some 10-20% of procurement budgets may be wasted. In a more corrupt country, the same road can cost almost 50% more than in a better governed one.

This is unacceptable. Given that it is taxpayers’ money involved, citizens should know why a school has not been built, why medicines are so expensive, or why a road is in disrepair after only one year. Business in Africa also suffers from unresponsive governments. In 16 of 19 countries surveyed in Sub-Saharan Africa, companies have to wait longer than 30 days to receive their payment.

However, not everything is bleak with regard to contracting in Africa. At the Open Government Partnership (OGP) Regional Africa Summit in Cape Town last week, a group of African thought leaders emerged who are transforming public procurement from a box-ticking exercise, to use open contracting so that it delivers better deals for governments, a level playing field for business, and quality goods and services for citizens.

One of these thought leaders is senior-deal-maker-turned-philanthropist Mo Ibrahim. During remarks at the Summit he broke the myth of commercially sensitive information in procurement. “There are no trade secrets in public contracts,” he said. “Winning business through an open contracting process is not altruism, it's good business”.

Kenneth Brown, Chief Procurement Officer in South Africa also said that we “need to deal with this evil [corruption] by tackling it head on”.

The Summit highlighted other powerful procurement innovations that are being unlocked across the continent:

• At the launch of South Africa’s new OGP National Action Plan, Deputy Minister Ayanda Dlodlo said that the government will work on implementing the open contracting principles and called for evaluation meetings to be open to the public. This positive remark from the deputy minister complements reforms recently undertaken by the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (OCPO) in the National Treasury. The OCPO has introduced a central supplier database and an eTender portal.
• The government of Zambia is developing a new e-procurement system that allows open data to be published in accordance with the Open Contracting Data Standard.                                     
• In Nigeria, civil society is building powerful analysis tools for public accountability. The Budeshi platform (budeshi.org) connects procurement and budget data. Civil society groups in Kenya and Malawi, supported by a newly formed working group on open contracting by the Africa Freedom of Information Center, also want to start using Budeshi.
• In Ghana, the only African country that included an open contracting commitment in its National Action plan, civil society reviewed local content provisions of draft contracts. They also launched two portals ouroilmoney.org and oilmoneytv.org.  
• In Uganda, the Public Procurement Authority signed an agreement with the Uganda Contracts Monitoring Coalition to ensure transparency and accountability in public contracts.
• Government representatives from a range of countries, such as Cote D'Ivoire, Burkina Faso and Sierra Leone, showed enthusiasm for open contracting at the Summit.

The next chapter of Africa’s development depends on getting contracting right. If, under the umbrella of the OGP, we help this new generation of open contracting to grow strong and to reach more countries and sectors, we can change the fate of Africa.

Please read the brief Open Contracting in Africa: The Next Generation of Africa.                          

OGP-Africa-Panel.jpg

South Africa is a special country for me and open contracting. It is where, in 2012, we held the first global meeting of open contracting, and where we returned last week for the OGP Regional Summit.

In the international development community we are often guilty of overselling the importance of conferences, but that first open contracting meeting in Johannesburg was truly transformative for our Partnership. Why?

At that meeting, over 100 stakeholders from all over the world co-designed the fundamentals of the open contracting agenda that we are all still collectively pursuing today: We decided to develop a set of global open contracting principles that emphasize disclosure and the use of procurement data. We began to develop a technical standard. And we agreed to move the coordination function of the Partnership from the World Bank to an independent team to be more agile, open and engaging. Open contracting wasn’t only an issue for poor countries at the core of the Bank’s mission – we all agreed that open contracting was global aspiration.

I still believe it is remarkable that a global effort has not only been built on so much collaborative design, but has also delivered on many of the promises made in Johannesburg in 2012. After all, we now have the Open Contracting Data Standard and we have moved the Partnership out of the World Bank. Most importantly, the community that joined us at the global meeting has become the backbone of open contracting. Participants from Ukraine to Uganda and the UK are now implementing open contracting in their countries.

Another auspicious connection between South Africa last week and open contracting is that the recent Summit in Cape Town was the first large public event that Sanjay Pradhan chaired as the new CEO of the OGP. Sanjay, who was my “big boss” at the World Bank (working at a mega institution like the Bank, I had several managers), was one of the masterminds behind the co-creation of open contracting as, what he called it, a ‘transformative global movement’.

So, at the OGP Regional Summit last week, we had a mini reunion of open contracting champions in Africa. There was definitely a buzz around open contracting. One of my favorite moments was when billionaire-deal-maker-turned-philanthropist Mo Ibrahim dispelled the myth of commercially sensitive information in procurement.

“There are no trade secrets in public contracts,” he said. “Winning business through open contracting process is not altruism, it's good business.”

This was only topped by Kenneth Brown, Chief Procurement Officer in South Africa dismissed so-called “unavoidable corruption” in procurement – often an excuse for inaction by businesses or governments because corruption is inevitable and no system is perfect – as “crap.” He told us straight: “We need to deal with this evil [corruption] by tackling it head on.”

My favorite session that really resonated with me was that on infomediaries and open contracting data. Infomediaries is a term used by our good friends at Hivos organizations and individuals that are able to digests and share complex information and data such as that on public contracting and make it accessible to others to speak to their concerns and to advocate for change. We had no panelists; no long speeches; simply practitioners across Africa connecting and sharing with practitioners, helping each other to tackle some of the challenges that come with advancing disclosure and engagement in public procurement. Open contracting clearly has some major obstacles to overcome in Africa, as we highlighted in a brief that we prepared for the Summit. But are most excited of the day-to-day work of these practitioners:

• The government of Zambia (not currently a member of the OGP) is developing a new e-procurement system that allows the publication of open data in accordance with the Open Contracting Data Standard. We will work with the Zambia procurement agency and encourage them to take full advantage to achieve better procurement outcomes.

• In Nigeria, civil society is building powerful analysis tools for public accountability. The Budeshi platform connects procurement and budget data. Civil society in Kenya and Malawi, supported by a newly formed working group on open contracting by the Africa Freedom of Information Center, also want to start using Budeshi, and we will use it to publish our own contracts and grant agreements. At the same time, we will continue to support Budeshi to improve the platform, data quality and collaboration with government agencies to ensure that there is follow up action from government on identified problems.

• In Ghana, the only African country that included an open contracting commitment in its National Action plan, civil society reviewed local content provisions of draft contracts. They also launched two portals ouroilmoney.org and oilmoneytv.org.

• At the launch of South Africa’s new National Action Plan, Deputy Minister Ayanda Dlodlo, said that they will work on implementing the open contracting principles and called for evaluation meetings to be open to the public. This positive remark from the Deputy Minister complements reforms recently undertaken by the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer in the National Treasury. The OCPO has introduced a central supplier database and an eTender portal.

Government representatives from a range of countries, such as Cote D'Ivoire, Burkina Faso and Sierra Leone, showed enthusiasm for open contracting at the Summit, and we are committed to support them in implementing reforms. As Sanjay Pradhan highlighted during his opening remarks at the Summit’s civil society day, what really matters is implementation. We have to count actions that impact citizens on the ground, not promises made.

That is exactly what we at the Open Contracting Partnership will strive to do. We want to support our friends and partners in Africa and around the world to turn their aspirations into actions.

Four years from now, I hope we will have another Africa reunion of open government and open contracting champions, where we will be able to celebrate, not only promises, but also results.

We, the undersigned organisations and campaigners working on freedom of information issues, are concerned by news that the World Bank has significantly downgraded its capacity to pursue a global right to information agenda at a time when the World Bank’s role in this area is needed more than ever before. We are concerned that both the decision itself and the diminished capacity of the Bank to engage on this critically important issue will send the unfortunate message to governments of developing countries around the world that the issue of transparency and, in particular, access to information, is no longer important or a donor priority. 

The full letter is transcribed below and is available in the original PDF here.

Dear President Kim,