Closing Space, Open Government? Civil society response to restrictions in OGP countries

Civicus/OGP Companion Paper

What civic space is and why it matters

In order for civil society to function, flourish and play a full role in promoting democracy, development, good governance and human rightsAn essential part of open government includes protecting the sacred freedoms and rights of all citizens, including the most vulnerable groups, and holding those who violate human rights accountable. T..., three essential rights must be respected and realised: the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly, and expression. Together, these three rights, recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and long established in international law and many national constitutions, determine the extent of civic space—the space in which civil society is able to form and act.

When civic space is limited, the essential contribution of civil society is not realised. Civil society organisations (CSOs) cannot fulfill a number of important roles, including fostering citizen participationAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, citizen participation occurs when “governments seek to mobilize citizens to engage in public debate, provide input, and make contributions that lead to m... More, exercising accountability in governance, advocating for policy change, and delivering essential services to otherwise excluded people. In open civic space, CSOs are able to act with autonomy to advance democracy, development, good governance, and human rights.

It follows that open civic space is key to successful OGP processes. In conditions of closed civic space, CSOs cannot fully play their role as OGP partners, and citizen oversight and participation will be limited. In open civic space, CSOs can participate as full partners, and citizens are free and able to demand greater accountability and transparencyAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, transparency occurs when “government-held information (including on activities and decisions) is open, comprehensive, timely, freely available to the pub... More from their governments.

Civic space in OGP countries

Unfortunately, the three fundamental civil society rights are often denied in practice, and over several years CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance, has seen a sustained and widespread assault on civic space. The CIVICUS Monitor, an online platform that tracks and rates civic space conditions in 195 countries, showed that in February 2018 there were serious restrictions on civic space in 109 countries (56 percent of countries), compared to only 44 countries (23 percent) that were classed as having open civic space. As a result, only four percent of the world’s population live in countries with open civic space.1

Moreover, the CIVICUS Monitor data makes clear that violations are occurring in both global north and global south countries, in every global region, and in countries operating under various forms of government. In short, CIVICUS believes there is a global civic space emergency, with the conditions for civil society having been further deteriorated in 2017.

OGP member states are not immune from this global civic space emergency. Of 72 OGP member countries, at the time of writing (excluding those listed as inactive or as having withdrawn), only 18 (25 percent) are rated by the CIVICUS Monitor as having ‘open’ civic space, with the highest number, 25 (35 percent), assessed as having ‘narrowed’ civic space, indicating that violations of the rights of association, peaceful assembly, and expression are taking place. Particularly serious restrictions are indicted by the categories of ‘obstructed’ civic space, into which 23 OGP countries (32 per cent) fall, and ‘repressed’ civic space, which exists in six (8 percent) of OGP members.

Notably, the data suggests that civic space in OGP member states is somewhat better than in non-member states. While 56 percent of states are classified as having serious civic space restrictions (in which civic space is rated as ‘obstructed’, ‘repressed’, or ‘closed’), in comparison only 40 percent of OGP members fall into these categories, and no OGP member is in the most restrictive category, of having ‘closed’ civic space. The data therefore indicate that there is a positive correlation between OGP membership and respect for civic space.

However, there continues to be considerable room for improvement. In spite of its commitments to transparency and participation in governance, 75 percent of OGP member states are currently classed as having less than fully open civic space. Action to defend and broaden civic space is urgently needed, including in OGP member states. Critical among these efforts is improving the effectiveness and impact of OGP processes.

The following sections discuss key drivers and enablers of current civic space restrictions and the tactics through which restriction is being exercised, and provide recommendations to address civic space challenges.