Civil Society has become a term which is now increasingly used to encompass social activity and societal organisations which, directly or indirectly, support, promote or struggle for democracy and democratisation. What is meant by ‘Civil Society’, however, is not clear. Civil Society is said to refer to the space between the state and the individual. There is agreement, in a broad sense, that it comprises socio-political institutions, voluntary associations and a public sphere within which people can debate, act and engage with each other in order to deal with the state.
Civil Society is crucial for democracy because it is the space between the public and private spheres where civic action takes place. Organisations and individuals from within civil society can hold the state accountable, share their experiences, promote their interests and learn values of civility and trust. As a rule, Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) are voluntary, non-profit organisations; that is, those who belong to such organisations join them out of free will and not as a result of sectarian organisations. CSOs are a product of their environments and as such, they reflect the social and cultural dimensions of the settings in which they operate.
NATURE OF CIVIL SOCIETY
The GCC States have a rentier economy. Much of the more recent literature on the rentier states concludes that independent groups are unimportant in the Gulf, that associational life is weak, and that the public space between the nuclear family and the state is sparsely populated. Oil revenues empower the state at the expense of society. Oil revenues allow the state to undercut existing social groups and to pre-empt the formation of new one. Oil revenues allow the state to weaken civil society. GCC rulers have shown a considerable antipathy to organised groups, even groups with the most apparently apolitical intentions.
However, the above view, as championed by Jill Crystal, Hazem Bablawi and Giacomo Luciani, H. Mahavi, Theda Skocpol, Jacques Delacroix etc., holds an extreme position.
Active political organisations, especially political parties, are banned in the GCC countries, although political activities do find some expression in non- governmental organisations such as clubs, professional associations, women’s societies, and philanthropic organisations. Voluntary organisations are embryonic. There are many CSOs which have sprung up in recent years. According to Baqer Al-Najjar’s estimate, their number is about 900. These are active mainly in Kuwait and Bahrain. In Oman also many CSOs, mainly in professional field, have been established. It is important to note that in Oman’s past, non-governmental organisations were almost always women’s associations. In the recent past, many professional and cultural associations have come into existence. CSOs exist in other GCC states also. However, the ability of such organisations to influence the status quo is limited due to many reasons, including their relative immaturity and their status within the dominant cultural and political context.
With the notable exception of Qatar, the GCC states are still governed by laws 20 to 40 years old. Qatar issued a new law in May 2004 recognising the right to establish professional associations and labour syndicates. The worker’s union includes worker committees set up at the level or work organisations. After Kuwait and Bahrain, Qatar was the third GCC States to allow such legislation.
POST 9/11 SCENARIO
As a consequence of the sustained war on terrorism and the international efforts to freeze possible terrorist assets, a number of ministerial decisions were issued in GCC states to regulate the activities of CSOs, particularly those operating in the filed of charitable and humanitarian assistance, both domestically and internationally. To illustrate this, let us take the example of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.
Saudi Arabia adopted a number of resolutions banning individuals and groups to donate without first securing an official permit as well as making it mandatory to disclose the source and the destination of funds.
In January 2004, four satellite offices of the Al-Haramain Charity Organisation were included in a list of organisations and companies implicated in providing funds for terrorist groups. Saudi Crown Prince, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz’s statement (January 22, 2004) that four branch offices of Al-Haramain in Indonesia, Kenya, Tanzania and Pakistan provided financial and logistical support to al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations, was affirmed by US treasury. Following US pressure, Saudi authorities closed down the overseas offices belonging to the organisation and later froze its financial assets in the Kingdom. A new Saudi National Authority for Charity Work was established. It was decided that Saudi authorities “will determine and cut off the sources funding any terrorist organisations.” In June 2004, under US pressure Shaikh Aqeel Al-Aqeel’s bank assets were frozen and his financial transactions were terminated.
In Kuwait, Foreign Minister Shaikh Al-Sabah openly stated that there are “possible links between some charity associations and terrorist organisations.” Consequently, a set of decisions determining the rules and regulations governing fund-raising campaigns by strictly implementing the principle of transparency insofar as the sources and destinations of funds were concerned, was issued.
CASE OF KUWAIT AND BAHRAIN
Even though existing legislation does grant some space for free movement and action for civil society organisations in some specific areas, it also provides the state with an arsenal of legal texts and stipulations that allow it to interfere in and impose regulations on the proceedings of CSOs. Some local authorities in the GCC states, sometimes prefer to ignore existing legislation that, when fully regarded, would severely incapacitate CSOs. At other times, however, governments are forced to take a strong stance against CSOs clearly transgressing their boundaries.
Politics often tends to hamper the progress of many non-governmental organisations, particularly those in Kuwait and Bahrain. However, the presence of political associations in both Bahrain and Kuwait that enjoy a good margin of political freedom has rendered the relationship between SCOs and the state more dialectical in nature and has enhanced the dynamism of the political scene in both countries. Consequently, though at times there have been tension between the SCOs and ruling regimes, yet they contributed to a political vibrancy unmatched by any other GCC states. However, there have been strains between the political opposition and state authority resulting in violence which clearly shows the vulnerability between the civil society and state interaction in Kuwait and to some extent in Bahrain.
Along with the unstable security conditions prevailing in Iraq, security developments in Saudi Arabia and the wide Islamist presence and a strong influence in the National Assembly have helped Islamist groups impose their agenda on Kuwait society. Issues such as the US military presence in Kuwait, agenda of political reform given by the US, women’s political participation and the attitude towards terrorist acts in Iraq and other Arab countries constitute the political aspects of the dispute between the Islamist movements and the state, just as the same issues stand at the core of the dispute between liberal groups and the government.
Strains between civil society and state have also been noticed in Bahrain. In late December 2003, the government banned the play entitled Abu Al-Aich by Al-Wefaq under the pretence that the association did not secure a licence from the Ministry of Information. Again, after a long-running tug-of-war the association somehow managed to hold a conference in 2004. The socio-political picture in Bahrain appeared at times to have regressed only to be followed by periods of serenity. However, it should be noted that civil society has shown maturity, if not fully but partially in both Kuwait and Bahrain as documented by Tareq Y. Ismael.
CIVIL SOCIETY AND WOMEN
The position of women in the GCC states is not as black and white as it seems. A closer analysis reveals each of these states striving in its own way to provide “the other half” of the population with better rather than equal opportunities. However, despite notable success, each state has its own scales of progress and a long way to go. Following is the state wise position of women.
BAHRAIN
The first Bahraini women’s group to emerge in 1953 was the special Society for Bahrain Women which eventually went on to become the Motherhood and Child Care Society. Another group established in 1955, the Nahdit Fatat Al Bahrain Society, continues to be prominent in promoting women’s education. Among the more active groups at present are the Bahrain Businesswomen Society (BBS) established in 2000, the Bahrain Women’s Society (BWS), and the Mustaqbal Society. In the 15 political societies in Bahrain, women held 21 (or 16 per cent) board seats as of 2005.
KUWAIT
Kuwaiti women have been strong defenders of their rights. They filed six court cases against women suffrage – though they lost all. The government contributes towards the creation of women’s organisations and there are about 55 such associations. Other organisations involved in social and voluntary work include the Kuwaiti Federation of Women established in 1994 which is permitted by the government to represent Kuwaiti women internationally. The Kuwaiti Women’s Movement, although active since 1962, only got wide support after the Gulf War whereby the Emir gave a public pledge to enhance the position of women.
OMAN
The Omani government is yet to authorise the creation of a human right’s organisation in the country. However, it must be noted that women’s enfranchisement took place as early as 1994. Around 42 women’s associations, granted approval by the government, exist.
QATAR
Women were given the right to vote in 1997. While announcing the decree, the Emir in his speech said, “Giving women the right of voting and contesting as candidate in elections is considered to be a wide stride on the road of popular participation in executive as well as legislative work.” As women are not allowed to form groups to work on issues concerning their own cause, they have chosen to take part in other forms of voluntary and charity work, including those conducted by organisations such as the Qatar Red Crescent Society.
SAUDI ARABIA
In 2003, some 50 women gave a petition entitled “In Defence of the Nation” to the king, and sought reforms. Women can be a part of professional associations and in recent times, are being selected to sit on the board of directors of such associations as the Saudi Journalist Association and the Saudi Engineers Council. Women entrepreneurs own more that 22,000 businesses and are said to own 40% of the nation’s private wealth. Private firms that extend loans to women entrepreneurs have mushroomed across the kingdom.
U.A.E.
The General Women’s Union is involved in women’s work in the country. Recently, in 2006, the Ministry of Social Affairs announced the formation of the Emirates Human Rights Society to be based in Abu Dhabi. The society covers all issues related to human rights, civil liberties, as well as matters that are socio-economic and political in nature. The late President Sheikh Zayed’s wife, Sheikha Fatima Bin Mubarak established the first women’s society in 1973, and in 1975 united all existing women’s societies under UAE Women’s Federation or now commonly known as the General Women’s Union (GWU).
In general, civil society in the GCC states has shown a good measure of development in some states, particularly, Bahrain and Kuwait. These two states remain on the top of the list not only in terms of the steadily increasing number of CSOs but also in terms of the strength of the relationship between CSOs and the respective political systems. In other GCC states some welcome changes are noticeable. For example, in Saudi Arabia, the most outstanding development during 2004 was the official constitution of a press association, even though the Saudi state retains the power to appoint one-third of its members. On the other hand, occasional strains are occurring between Civil Society and the state. For example, in 2004, a number of CSOs were dissolved in Saudi Arabia (Al-Haramayan Charity Organisation) and Bahrain (Centre of Human Rights). At times, the inner dynamics between state and CSOs reached at a point of almost collapse (Islamists assertion in Kuwait). The women’s issue in the context of CSOs, as discussed earlier, has shown improvement. One should not forget that CSOs are moulded and defined by the social, cultural, economic and even political milieu out of which they came into existence.
[The writer is Reader, Centre for West Asian Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi]