EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY

Consultative Dialogue Framework for the

Private Sector, Civil Society and Other

Interest Groups in the EAC Integration

Process ( Adopted by Council)

EAC Secretariat

November 2012

2

List of Abbreviations

ACHRD African Centre for Human Rights and Development

ACP African Caribbean and Pacific Island States

ADB African Development Bank

ATN Africa Trade Network

AU African Union

BCI Business Climate Index

CAADP Comprehensive African Agriculture Development

CSD Commission on Sustainable Development

CSO Civil Society Organisation

COMESA Common Market of Eastern and Southern African States

DFID Department for International Development

EABC East African Business Council

EAC East African Community

EACJ East African Court of Justice

EACSOF East African Civil Society Forum

EALA East African Legislative Assembly

EALGA East African Local Governments Association

EALS East African Law Society

EASSI East African Sub-Regional Support Initiative for the Advancement

of Women

EATUC East African Trade Union Confederation

ECOSOC Economic and Social Council

ECOSOCC Economic, Social and Cultural Council

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

EESC European Economic and Social Committee

3

E&NR Environment and Natural Resources

ETUC European Trade Union Confederation

EPA Economic Partnership Agreements

EU European Union

FBO Faith Based Organisation

FCCIB Federal Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Burundi

G&D Governance and Development

IFC International Finance Corporation

IGAD Inter-governmental Authority on Development

KCSA Kenya Civil Society Alliance

KEPSA Kenya Private Sector Alliance

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

NGO Non Governmental Organisation

NSA Non State Actor

NTB Non tariff Barrier

OAU Organisation of African Unity

OECD Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development

PPD Public –Private Dialogues

PSDS Private Sector Development Strategy

PSFU Private Sector Foundation of Uganda

PSO Private Sector Organisation

P&S Peace and Security

PWD Persons with Disabilities

RW-PSF Rwanda Private Sector Federation

SADC South African Development Community

S&E Social and Economic affairs

4

SMEs Small and Micro Enterprises

S&T Science and Technology

TPSF Tanzania Private Sector Federation

TORs Terms of Reference

WACSOF West African Civil Society Forum

WTO World Trade Organisation

5

Executive Summary

1. This report provides a consultative framework for structured dialogue between the

East African Community, Private Sector Organisations Civil Society Organisations and

Other Interest Groups within the context of the requirements of Article 127, 128 and

129 of the East African Community Treaty. The dialogue is so as to ensure that the

integration process proceeds with the involvement of the citizens of East Africa and is

undertaken in the context of multi-stakeholder partnerships. This will ensure that the

Objectives of widening and deepening co-operation among the Partner States in

among other areas, political, economic, social, cultural, health, education, science and

technology, defense, security, legal and judicial affairs is achieved for the benefit of the

people of East Africa.

2. The development of the dialogue framework is in accordance with the directive of the

Council of Ministers at its 19th Council Meeting where they directed the Secretary

General to operationalize the forum envisaged under Article 127 of the Treaty. It is also

developed against the noted limitations with the past efforts and structures for

involvement of both civil society and private sector in East Africa integration process,

notably the provision for grant of observer status.

3. The report notes that from the national experiences, civil society organisations have

been less successful relative to their private sector counterparts in organising around

sectors and themes and in creating viable lobby networks. Most of the thematic or

sectoral networks that civil society organisations have created have been impulsive and

episodic and have not lasted beyond donor-funding while private sector organisations

have been able to grow viable networks because of their ability to self-finance.

4. From the national experiences, there are good practices in dialogue which can be

improved upon. For instance, the national budget debate processes in Uganda and

Kenya, the creation of anti-corruption unit in Kenya, and the established multilateral

and regional trade negotiation national platforms in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda all

6

provide useful examples that it is both possible for civil society and private sector to

organise together on common interests but also that despite their obvious parallel

interests it is possible to reach consensus-based solutions. Similarly, the establishment

of the Rwanda Civil Society Platform and Rwanda’s proposed Civil Society funding Act

also attest to the possibility that civil society organisations can agree to organise

together but also that they don’t have to rely on the unsustainable donor-funding for

their continued existence. On the same note, the another good practice is to be found in

the establishment of Tanzania National Business Council that it possible to organise and

mobilise private sector nationally to speak with one voice.

5. Other regional arrangements and international processes are replete with cases of good

examples providing useful lessons for the design of a framework for EAC. For example,

the UN, European Union, SADC, Africa Union and the ECOWAS established processes of

engagement of civil society and private sector.

6. The dialogue framework envisaged involves both formal and informal processes. The

dialogue framework will be dynamic and capable of adapting to future developments

and guided by key principles forming the Charter of Good Practice for public-private

dialogues, which requires most importantly that the dialogue structure remains

comprehensive yet simple to implement, allowing for both formal and informal

engagements; that it has proactive (and nor domineering) champions and facilitators;

and, that it be embedded with effective monitoring and evaluation and feedback

mechanisms.

7. The dialogue framework envisages continuous dialogue between EAC, Partner States,

CSOs, PSOs and Other Interest Groups both at the national and regional level. National

dialogue shall be coordinated through the Ministries responsible for EAC Affairs while

regional dialogue will be at two levels. Continuous dialogue in accordance with the EAC

calendar of activities and an annual forum convened a by the Secretary General of the

East African Community. The meeting will be organised collaboratively based on an

agenda agreed upon between the private sector, civil society and other interest groups

7

and the EAC Secretariat. It requires that PSOs and CSOs be organised at the regional

level through regional apex bodies.

8. The desirable state for the success of the dialogue framework is to have apex bodies for

private sector, civil society and other interest groups. Those bodies require to be

democratic and to derive their legitimacy from their respective sectors. At the national

level, the regional apex bodies will link through the national focal points and networks

for civil society and private sector through which national positions will be formed and

through the regional body, regional positions will be harmonized. The national focal

points will link to the relevant ministry for EAC Affairs which will also forward

positions to the EAC as the coordinating ministry. Additionally, the regional position

will also be submitted through the regional body to the EAC Secretariat and the relevant

EAC decision-making bodies.

9. It is desirable that other interest groups that desire to engage in the dialogue process

also organise themselves into umbrellas and networks. This is so as to enhance synergy,

collaboration and ensure efficiency and effectiveness in the dialogue process. This way

it will be easy for the interest groups to participate in meetings and processes as they

will be organised and coordinated thus reducing costs and ensuring alignment and

harmonisation of positions by the members of each of those interest groups before their

presentation at the regional dialogue.

10. The design of the Dialogue Framework envisions CSOs, PSOs and Other Interest Groups

working together on general and thematic issues on areas of mutual interest. Therefore,

in addition to the SG Forum, the EAC is to include both CSOs, PSOs and Other Interest

groups in the ongoing regional fora based on their interests. This includes the

Investment Forum , the Women in Business Forum, the Media Summit, Youth Forum,

Persons with Disabilities Conference, etc. similar endeavours shall be made to include

other interest groups, like the ongoing consultations with political parties

8

11. The design of the dialogue also envisions inter and intra-PSO and CSO dialogue, PSO-

CSO roundtables with ministries at the national level, which requires enhancement of

the present PPDs in the various partner states to include all stakeholders interested.

12. EABC and EACSOF are envisaged as the current regional representatives of Private

Sector and Civil Society respectively. However this position should be reviewed by the

stakeholders within the respective sector every three years. In the meantime EACSOF

must obtain the necessary mandate and ownership from its stakeholders – the CSOs,

both regionally and nationally; and must build its awareness amongst all stakeholders

and ensure it is inclusive of all CSOs.

13. The recognition of EABC and EACSOF does not depart from the rule of inclusivity and

diversity, which recognises other voices in the dialogue process. Towards this end the

structure is dynamic enough to accommodate other groups be they professional bodies,

those with observer status, trade unions, faith based groups and other interest groups

that desire to participate in the dialogue process as distinct groups separate from the

private sector and Civil Society and separate from the designated representatives, being

EACSOF and EABC.

14. At the national level, there is need to establish civil society frameworks for engagement

or improving the existing ones. Support for this process by the civil society themselves

and from development partners will be critical.

15. While the end result is to have a single civil society and private sector umbrella

organisations at the regional, it is imperative that in the initial stages of the dialogue,

the attendance be widened to include representation of networks and umbrellas

outside EACSOF and EABCs. Support to both EACSOF and EABC to undertake reform of

their structures and widen their membership is also imperative.

16. The structure provides clear avenues for feedback and accountability mechanisms.

However, these will depend on the ability of EAC to facilitate all the proposed dialogues.

It will thus be important to revisit and as part of that process strengthen the EAC

9

Secretariat. Such areas that will require immediate attention include increased resource

allocation as well as implementation of an effective communication strategy. The same

approach should be applied on the CSO and PSO representative institutions that will

anchor the engagements of their individual members in the process of dialogue.

17. The Institutional framework within the EAC secretariat for supporting the dialogue

process requires reforms. In the current arrangements there is a department

responsible for private sector and another responsible for Gender, Community

Development and Civil Society. It is imperative that clarity on dialogue coordination be

established and collaboration between the two departments be enhanced to ensure

success of the dialogue framework. In the long term, it is essential that the rules of grant

of observer status be reviewed and consideration be given to upgrading the Secretary

General’s Forum into and Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) borrowing from the

EU model. The discussions as part of the ongoing Institutional Review of the EAC

provide opportunities for commencing these discussions.

10

Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 12

1.1 Introduction and Contextual Background ........................................................................... 12

1.2 Milestones in the development of a dialogue framework ................................................... 15

1.3 Structure of the report .................................................................................................... 16

CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................... 18

STATUS OF NON-STATE ACTORS INVOLVEMENT IN EAC REGIONAL INTEGRATION

....................................................................................................................................................... 18

2.1 Definitional Issues .............................................................................................................. 18

2.2 The Treaty underpinning for engagement of Non-State actors in EAC ............................. 19

2.3 Mechanisms and Experiences of Engagements of Civil Society Private Sector and Other

Interest Groups within EAC...................................................................................................... 22

2.3.1. Structures and mechanisms for Private Sector engagement ................................. 22

2.3.2. Structures and mechanisms for Civil Society engagement ......................................... 24

2.3.3. Structures and mechanisms for engagement by Other Interest Groups .............. 26

2.4 Acquisition of Observer Status in the EAC ................................................................... 30

2.5Private Sector and Civil Society Engagement Limitations .................................................. 32

CHAPTER THREE ...................................................................................................................... 35

COMPARATIVE EXPERIENCE AND BEST PRACTICE IN DIALOGUE WITH CIVIL

SOCIETY AND PRIVATE SECTOR .......................................................................................... 35

3.1 Literature Review and Findings .......................................................................................... 35

3.2 Analysis of the Experience of Non-State Actors’ Dialogue Frameworks in various

Regional and International Processes ....................................................................................... 51

3.3 Principles of Effective Public-Private Dialogue ................................................................. 54

CHAPTER FOUR ......................................................................................................................... 58

DIALOGUE FRAMEWORK FOR EAC AND CIVIL SOCIETY, PRIVATE SECTOR AND

OTHER INTEREST GROUPS..................................................................................................... 58

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 58

4.2 Proposed Dialogue Framework ..................................................................................... 58

4.3 Objectives of the Dialogue.................................................................................................. 61

4.4 Principles of the Dialogue ................................................................................................... 63

4.5 Process of Dialogue ........................................................................................................... 64

4.6 Legal and Operational Issues ......................................................................................... 66

4.7 The Secretary General’s Forum .......................................................................................... 68

4.9 Other Avenues for Dialogue with Civil Society and Private Sector ................................... 68

CHAPTER FIVE .......................................................................................................................... 69

11

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 69

References ..................................................................................................................................... 72

12

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction and Contextual Background

Dialogue between the state, civil society and private sector has emerged as an important

feature of recent development economics. The upsurge of interest in creating

developmental states has further strengthened the need for state to dialogue with the civil

society and private sector, mainly as a means for stepping up the role of private sector and

civil society in development and ensuring that development is equitable, inclusive and

widely owned. Because of the growing interest in the participation of civil society and

private sector throughout the policy-circle, it is increasingly necessary not only to promote

understanding of how such dialogues can be carried out but also to understand what such

dialogues can and cannot achieve.

The state, private sector, civil society and other interest groups dialogues may take many

forms. They can be structured or ad hoc, formal or informal. They may focus on wide-

ranging or specific issues. They can be initiated by forward-thinking governments,

frustrated entrepreneurs, progressive civil society or third parties such as international

donor agencies. In the case of the East African Community (EAC) Partner States, the

dominant forms of state-public dialogues are those between governments and private

sector organizations, otherwise known as public-private dialogues (PPDs); the civil society

are in most cases not part of these PPDs.

At the EAC regional level, the private sector has been better organized and has participated

more effectively in the integration processes compared to civil society. There are a number

of national and regional sector-based private sector associations but also an overarching

regional apex body known as East Africa Business Council (EABC) established in 1997,

which are stronger lobby groups on private sector interests. The civil society organizations,

13

on the other hand, appear disjointed without an overarching regional apex body apart from

the embryonic East African Civil Society Forum (EACSOF) which has been in existence since

2006 and although it has made some progress in seeking to be the voice of civil society in

the region still suffers legitimacy and representations concerns from civil society

organisations in the region. In addition other groups have also engaged the EAC either

through obtaining observer status or through informal channels as individual organisations

or as umbrella institutions. Examples of the latter include the nascent umbrella for local

government authorities in east Africa, the East Africa Association of Local Government

Authorities and the umbrella for Trade Unions, the East African Trade Union Council

(EATUC).

The Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community provides a comprehensive

framework for cooperation amongst the Partner States with the overriding objectives of

“developing policies and programmes aimed at widening and deepening cooperation

among the partner States in political, economic, social and cultural fields, research and

technology, defense, security and legal and judicial affairs, for their mutual benefit.” In

achieving this objective the Partner States are required to enhance and strengthen

partnerships with the private sector and civil society while ensuring that gender and all

marginalised sectors are mainstreamed in the process. .

The rationale for the above requirement is so as to ensure that the EAC integration process

proceeds, in accordance with the stipulations of the Treaty, in a people-centred and private

sector driven manner and taking into account the lessons from the collapse of the original

EAC. Those lessons evidence that the non-participation of critical stakeholders notably

private sector and civil society was one of the major causes for the collapse of the original

East African Community in 1977.

Since the launch of the EAC, following the entry into force of the Treaty in 2000, Civil

Society and Private Sector have participated in the affairs of the community through the

stages of the Customs Union to the Common Market. However, despite the provisions of the

Treaty requiring increased and structured involvement of the private sector and civil

14

society in EAC integration processes, the levels and mechanisms for their participation has

been unstructured, episodic and discretional to the EAC organs and institutions inviting

them. The Treaty of the EAC envisages a more organized and institutionalized mechanism

for engaging Private Sector, Civil Society and other interest groups in the Community’s

integration processes. This desire is borne out of the need to ensure inclusive, broad-based

and sustainable development and avoid the pitfalls of the previous Community (involving

Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda), which collapsed in 1977 after a decade of cooperation.

The current framework for direct engagement by the Private Sector, Civil Society and Other

Interest Groups in the EAC affairs is through the grant of observer status pursuant to

Article Three of the Treaty. But the procedure for the grant of observer status and the rules

on participation have been criticised for their restrictiveness and stringency, hence the low

numbers of civil society organisations, private sector organizations and other interest

groups that have actually applied for and obtained observer status.

Despite the low levels of engagement of civil society and private sector actors in EAC

processes, the regional integration process has made very commendable and positive

strides from the launch of the Community, establishment and operationalisation of the

Community organs and institutions, the customs union, the common market to discussions

on the monetary union and the political federation. But this has translated into an

integration process which is considered as a top-down “integration of states”, rather than a

bottom-up “integration of citizens”. It has also resulted in lack of local ownership of the

Community policies and programmes. This perception requires to be eradicated through

deliberate and tangible measures so as to ensure involvement of the citizenry in the

integration process and a sense of ownership by east Africans. Ensuring direct

participation in the EAC decision making process will inculcate a sense of regional identity,

local ownership and provide both the legitimacy of the EAC and its ability to further the

interests of the citizens of East Africa.

The above provides the backdrop of this assignment –the need to develop a framework for

effective dialogue amongst civil society and private sector themselves and with the Partner

15

States and the EAC. As much as possible, the Community has to be “brought close to the

people” through their various groups. It is also crucial that the organs and institutions of

the EAC evolve in a manner that reflects the social, economic and political conditions and

interests of citizens in the region.

1.2 Milestones in the development of a dialogue framework

The desire to have an institutionalised dialogue framework is shared by the EAC, civil

society and private sector and has received support from some development partners in

the region. The original structured efforts to put in place such a framework occurred in

2003, when a background paper prepared for the East African Community Secretariat

made recommendations for establishing mechanisms for structured dialogue. However,

except for the participation by CSOs and PSOs as observers in EAC meetings and invitation

to conferences and informal meetings, no concrete steps were taken to establish structured

dialogue mechanisms. At the 19th Meeting of the Council of Ministers of the EAC, the

Secretariat was directed to “formalize the forum provided for under Article 127(4) of the

EAC Treaty with a proposal on Rules of Procedure to guide the participation of the private

sector and civil society and other interest groups.”(EAC/CM 19/Directive 27).

In implementing this directive, the Secretariat with support from GIZ and TIMEA organised

several consultative meetings that resulted in the validation of a framework for dialogue.

The initial meeting took place in May 2011, in Arusha. At that regional workshop attended

by representatives from the Partner States, EAC Secretariat, PSOs and CSOs, a Working

Group comprising representatives from the EAC, the EABC and the EACSOF was agreed

upon to fine-tune modalities for effective and popular participation and involvement of

non- state actors in the EAC integration process. The meeting agreed on the Terms of

Reference (TORs) for the development of the framework and recommended the hiring of a

consultant to develop a draft framework for consideration by stakeholders. Dr Collins

Odote from the University of Nairobi was subsequently hired for the task. The TORs for the

consultant is attached as appendix I. Following this meeting, an experts’ retreat was

organised in the month of August 2011 in Nairobi in which a draft structure of Dialogue

Framework for both Private Sector and Civil Society, objectives and principles were

16

discussed and agreed. For further development of the dialogue framework, it was

recommended that national consultations be held with the relevant stakeholders in each of

the Partner States. These national consultations were held as follows: Burundi (13/9/11);

Uganda (15/9/11); Tanzania (21/9/11); Kenya (27/9/11); and Rwanda (3/10/11). The

list of stakeholders consulted is attached as appendix II.

Following the completion of national consultations, a stakeholders meeting was held in

Bujumbura i (10-11/10/ 2011) to consider the revised dialogue framework. Stakeholders

present directed that the dialogue framework be finalised and circulated to Partner States

for consideration and validation. On 7th and 8th November 2011, representatives of Partner

States, CSOs, PSOs and the EAC Secretariat met at Arusha, considered and validated the

framework detailed in this report for the dialogue between the EAC, CSOs and PSOs. They

resolved that the framework be presented to the Council for their consideration in

accordance with the Council Directive at their 19th meeting. The Framework was presented

to the 24th Council of Ministers meeting who referred it to the Sectoral Council Responsible

for EAC Affairs and Planning. The Council directed that the Dialogue Framework be

finalised to provide for engagement with Civil Society, Private Sector and other interest

groups, including political parties.

1.3 Structure of the report

This report is divided into five chapters. Chapter one introduces the study, providing its

rationale and highlights the process in the development of the dialogue framework.

Chapter two analyses the status of non-state actors’ involvement in regional integration in

EAC, the existing structures and mechanisms of engagement. Chapter three undertakes

comparative analysis of the dialogue structure for several regional and international

processes to identify good practices that could be borrowed to influence development of

EAC Dialogue Framework. It discusses the options for establishing dialogues that include

government, civil society and private sector and sets out the key internationally-agreed

dialogue principles. Chapter four discusses the core of the proposed EAC-PSO-CSO dialogue

framework, its objectives, principles and rules of procedure. It clearly provides the

17

structure and institutional arrangements for the dialogue and stipulates the process and

stages of dialogue both at the national and regional level. It proposes avenues for resource

mobilisation to support the dialogue process and discusses the framework for monitoring

and evaluation as well as dispute settlement mechanisms. Finally, chapter five contains a

summary of conclusions and recommendations including the operational processes for

implementing the proposed dialogue framework.

18

CHAPTER TWO

STATUS OF PRIVATE SECTOR, CIVIL SOCIETY AND OTHER INTEREST

GROUPS INVOLVEMENT IN THE EAC INTEGRATION PROCESS

2.1 Definitional Issues

The Consultative Dialogue Framework envisaged under Article 127(4) of the Treaty is to

enable “Civil Society”, “Private Sector” and “other interest groups” to participate in the EAC

processes. Clarity on the meaning of the three terms is therefore critical to formalizing the

dialogue framework. “Civil society” has become a central theme in contemporary thought

about philanthropy and civic activity, yet it is difficult to define, inherently complex, and

resistant to being categorized or interpreted through a singular theoretical lens. The term

is increasingly used to suggest how public life should function within and between

societies; at the same time, it provides a way of describing the social action that occurs

within the context of voluntary associations or intermediary bodies.1 According to the

World Bank, "Civil Society" is defined as “the arena in which people come together to

pursue the interest they have in common; not for profit or the exercise of political power,

but because they care enough about something to take collective action”. In the context of

the EAC Treaty, Article 1, “civil society” is defined as "a realm of organised social life that is

voluntary, self-generating, self-supporting, autonomous from the state, and bound by a

legal set of shared rules.” This definition implies that Civil Society Organisations should be

independent of the EAC. However, at a Workshop of EAC Civil Society Experts2, during the

process of developing an EAC Civil, Society mobilisation strategy proposals were made to

amend this definition to include “the common good of the people” and therefore to redefine

civil society as "A realm of organised social life that is voluntary, self-generating, and

autonomous from the state, and bound by a set of shared values for the common good of

the people”.

1 Peterson, T.J. and Van Till, J. “Defining Characteristics of Civil Society” Vol. 6(2) International Journal of Not-

for-Profit Law, 2004. 2EAC civil Society Mobilisation Strategy, see footnote 8.

19

The "Private Sector", on the other hand, is defined in the Treaty as the part of the economy

that is not owned or directly controlled by a state. To understand the difference between

the two terms one would need to divide society into family, state and market (private

sector and business). Civil Society would comprise the realm of society outside these three

spheres. Within the EAC, human rights groups, grassroots organisations, labour

unions, youth and gender movements, environmental movements, religious bodies,

farmers’ organisations, the academic community, research institutions, professional

associations, and the media are recognised as part and parcel of the civil society.

The Treaty of the EAC, however, includes other interest groups out of the appreciation that

there would be categories that would not be part of state yet not neatly fall within the Civil,

Society or private sector categorisation. Typical groups would include trade unions, faith

based organisations (FBOs), professional associations and local authorities. Political parties

are also a critical factor in regional integration. The definition of other interest groups is

broad enough to include private sector too. The essence is to make the dialogue process as

representative of the totality of key groups within the EAC region as possible. Within this

report, the term “non-state actors” is sometimes applied to represent the totality of Civil

Society, Private Sector and other interest groups.

2.2 The Treaty underpinning for engagement of Private Sector, Civil

Society and Other Interest Group s in EAC integration process

The entire EAC Treaty weaves the important role of private sector civil society and other

interest groups and calls for their involvement in the integration process. The Preamble to

the Treaty commences this recognition by pointing out that one of the key reasons for the

collapse of the Community in 1977 was the “lack of strong participation of private sector

and civil society in the co-operation activities” while Article 3 makes provision for granting

of observer status for civil society on the basis that they can participate as observers in

formal EAC processes.

20

As pointed out, the Objectives of the Community are set out in Article 5(1), which are to

develop policies and programs aimed at widening and deepening cooperation among the

Partner States in political, economic, social and cultural fields, research and technology,

defence, security and legal and judicial affairs for mutual benefits of the Partner States.

However, to achieve these objectives, the Community [in Article 5(3)(g)] seeks to enhance

and strengthen partnership with the private sector and civil society in order to achieve

sustainable socio-economic and political development. Similarly, in Article 5(3) (e), the

Community seeks to mainstream gender in all its endeavours and to enhance the role of

women in cultural, social, political, economic and technological development.

The main provisions on civil society and private sector participation is covered in Chapter

Twenty Five (Articles 127,128 and 129) of the Treaty. Article 127 on "Creation of an

Enabling Environment for the Private Sector and Civil Society", broadly provides for: a) an

enabling environment for the participation private sector and the civil society in

community affairs; b) the formulation of a strategy for the development of the private

sector; and c) the promotion of a continuous dialogue with the private sector, civil society

and other interest groups at the national and the Community level. Partner states commit

to:

• Promoting conducive investment codes, protection of property rights and proper

regulation of private sector

• Infrastructural linkages, removal of barriers and constraints to market

development and production

• Provision of commercial intelligence and promotion of cooperation among

chambers of commerce and industry

• Promotion of cross-border investments

• Strengthening role of national business associations

• In collaboration with national chambers of commerce and industry, establishing

lending institutions for private sector especially small-scale entrepreneurs.

21

Article 128 specifically urges for strengthening of the private sector with partner states

adopting programmes for promoting and strengthening the role of the private sector as an

effective force for the development of their respective economies. Article 129 addresses

cooperation among business organisations and professional bodies, including employees

and employers organisations. In addition to action that partner states are to take in this

regard, they also commit to “encourage and promote the taking of useful decision by the

Council and other relevant institutions of the Community in areas affecting the Private Sector

and to monitor the implementation of such decision.”

Of particular relevance are the provisions of Article 127(4) and 128(3) and 129(2). Article

127 (4) relevantly provides that “ The Secretary General Shall provide the forum for

consultations between the private sector, civil society organisations, other interest groups and

appropriate institutions of the community.” This is the Article under which the current

assignment is hinged based on the decision of the Council of Ministers in response to an

application by the EABC to be made an institution of the Community. In addition, however,

Article 128(3) mandates the partner states to take such additional measures as may be

determined by Council so as strengthen Private Sector. Similarly, Article 129(2) requires

the Council to “establish modalities that would enable the business organisations or

associations, professional bodies and the civil society in the Partner States to contribute to the

development of the Community.”

The upshot of the foregoing is a clear demonstration of the anchorage within the Teary of a

dialogue framework between the EAC and CSOs, Private Sector and other interest groups

so as to widen and deepen the integration process.

22

2.3. Mechanisms and Experiences of Engagements of Civil Society Private

Sector and Other Interest Groups within EAC

2.3.1. Structures and mechanisms for Private Sector engagement

The EAC region has a wide range of apex and non- apex organizations, which can be used as

vehicles for private sector participation in the regional integration process. There exists a

2006-2010 “Private Sector Development Strategy” (PSDS) which focuses on strengthening

of an "Enabling Environment”. The Strategy having come to an end, there is discussions to

review its implementation as a basis for developing a new Strategy in line with the

requirements of the Treaty. The EAC Secretariat also has a unit known as “Department in

charge of Investment and Private Sector Promotion” which coordinates the implementation

of the PSDS and fosters the direct involvement of the private sector in EAC integration

processes.

The engagement of the private sector in the EAC affairs has been both informal and formal.

Informal contacts are mainly in the formats like workshops or conferences in which EABC

as the lead private sector organisation in the region has engaged in EAC integration and

negotiations including economic partnership agreements (EPAs) where private sector

usually is incorporated in the official government delegations. National dialogues with the

state are spearheaded by the private sector focal points of the respective Partner States.

This is done in Tanzania through the Tanzania Private Sector Federation (TPSF), in Kenya

through the Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA), in Uganda through Private Sector

Foundation of Uganda (PSFU), in Rwanda through the Rwanda Private sector Federation

(RW-PSF) and in Burundi through the Federal Chamber of Commerce and Industry of

Burundi (FCCIB). Large companies tend to invest more in advocacy and have stronger

informal ties with national governments than with the Secretariat. At the regional level,

individual companies seem to channel their engagement through EABC.

Formal interactions with private sector is mainly through the PPDs existing both at the

national level in all Partner States (except Burundi where the idea is still at the proposal

stage) and at the regional level. At the regional level, the EABC holds regular meetings with

the Secretariat and is allowed to attend higher-level meetings at the Council and Sectoral

23

Council meetings and even the Summit. It has observer status with the EAC. In addition, the

EABC meets every two months with the management of the Secretariat including the

Secretary General (GIZ, 2011).

National PSO Engagement Structures: The Picture of Now

Other BMOs

EABC Secretariat

National BMOs e.g. KAM and Chambers

FCCIBKEPSATPSF PSFUPSF-RW

Other PSO Apex e.g. EAFF

Wider Private Sector businesses working on wide-

ranging sectors/activities

National PSO--

Gov’t Platform

e.g. PPD

Various common workshops have been arranged either through the private sector desk at

the EAC or EABC on various issues including tax harmonisation in EAC and the EPA

negotiations. The EABC pioneered Business Climate Index Surveys (2008) through the

support of GTZ and the non-tariff barriers (NTB) Monitoring Mechanism was developed

between the Secretariat and the EABC. The Department in charge of Investment and

Private Sector Promotion for private sector continues to organise annual EAC Investment

Conference and has also organised the following: Lake Tanganyika Investment Conference

and Lake Victoria Investment Forum as well as Sectoral Investment Conferences on

Agriculture, Tourism, Petroleum, and Juakali.

24

2.3.2. Structures and mechanisms for Civil Society engagement

Civil society has important roles to play in the EAC integration and development processes.

They work to enhance social dialogue and to create public support for integration. This

way, they help to cultivate stakeholder appreciation, confidence and ownership of the

integration process and its benefits. They can also engage in tracking implementation and

performance of the integration and in proposing suggestions to improve performance.

Hence, the role of civil society in EAC should be seen as encompassing the policy-cycle,

which includes, policy preparation, policy decision making, policy operationalisation, policy

implementation, and policy monitoring and evaluation.

With regards to engagement structures for civil society, there exists a Department of

Gender, Community Development and Civil Society established in June 2008 within the

Directorate of Productive and Social Sectors at the EAC secretariat.

One of the responsibilities of the Department is to promote the participation of Civil

Society, especially women, youth and other organisations and mainstream them in EAC

polices, programmes and projects. As part of its mandate the department spearheaded the

development of a Civil Society Mobilisation Strategy, had it presented to the Council which

directed further consultations on it before finalisation. Since its establishment the

Department has held a series of meetings and undertaken critical activities have been held

as flows:

� With GTZ support and in collaboration with EALGA (East African Local Government

Associations), national consultations have been organised for Local Governments in all

five Partner States on how to mobilize communities on EAC integration. A sensitization

Manual was developed by a Consultant. Unfortunately, the document was never

considered by decision-making organs.

� EAC and EACSFOF organised the 3rd Annual Forum in Arusha and the report of the

Forum was considered by the Summit (2009).

25

� First and second Meetings of Experts on the formulation of a strategic plan for gender,

youth, children, persons with disabilities, social protection and community

development where CSO were part of the delegations from Partner States.

� First meeting of Civil Society mobilization Experts (November. 2009) where the first

draft Civil Society Mobilisation Strategy was formulated.

� Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been agreed between the East African

Community with EASSI and Africa Youth Trust.

� Two Meetings with EALA, Africa Youth Trust and the Secretariat on the issues of youth

in the region have been organized.

� A high level conference on Persons with disabilities (PWDs) was held in Kampala

(2010) as a process to discuss and develop a policy and law to address challenges facing

persons with disabilities in the EAC region.

� High Level Conference on the Role of Women in Socio-Economic Development and

Women in Business (August 2011)

� First, second and third Meetings of the Forum of Ministers responsible for Social

Development have been held during September 2008, October 2009 and July 2011.

� Establishment of a Sectoral Council on Gender, Youth, Children, Social Protection and

Community Development in December 2010.

� Finally, it is the Department of Gender, Community Development and Civil Society that

strongly advocated the process for developing an institutionalized dialogue mechanism

for PSOs and CSOs preceding a Council Decision that later gave the process a high-level

impetus.

Following the creation of EACSOF, six thematic areas were identified through which civil

society activities should be organised. The proposed thematic areas of engagement under

EACSOF are: Governance and Democratization (G&D); Peace and Security (P&S); Social and

economic affairs (S&E); Environment and Natural Resources (E&NR); Science and

Technology (S&T); and, other thematic areas as may emerge.

Even prior to EACSOF, there already existed civil society networks on specialized issues

and some of these CSO networks have been engaging episodically on EAC integration issues

26

and at the national level on specific national issues like budget process, corruption, human

rights programmes and many others. According to EACSOF Constitution, the Forum seeks

to invite membership from individual CSO organisations as well as from CSO associations.

The fact of the matter is that to-date, membership in EACSOF is still low and the existing

CSO networks are yet to become members of EACSOF.

National PSO-CSO-

Gov’t Platform e.g.

KEPLOTRADE

Wider Civil Society Organisations

Existing CSO Networks

EACSOF Secretariat

EACSOF National Chapters

OthersE&NRS&E S&TP&SG&D

Other CSO Apex e.g. EALS

National CSO Engagement Structures: The Picture of Now

2.3.3. Structures and mechanisms for engagement by Other Interest Groups

In addition to Civil Society and Private Sector, the EAC Treaty recognises the involvement

of other interest groups in the integration process. While this term is not defined anywhere

within the treaty, it provides space for other organised non-state groups that do not neatly

fall into the category of civil society or private sector or are not comfortable being put

together as part of these two categories to also engage distinctly.

27

Groups that have or could engage the EAC under this category include trade unions, faith

based organisations, indigenous groups, farmers associations and professional groups.

Other unique entities that while not neatly falling within the strict categorisation, but

which an expansive approach can incorporate and which are critical within the EAC

integration context include political parties and local government associations

East African Local Government Association

The East African Local Government Association was established in 2005 as the umbrella

body for local government associations from Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. It was

established to advocate for the interests of and represent local governments in east Africa

in maintaining a conducive environment for sustainability, promotion of the principles of

local governance based on respect for democratic values, and in strengthening the

cooperation among the partner states of East African Community. EALGA provides political

space for local authorities’ participation in East African regional integration processes.

EALGA would provide a unique opportunity for listening to leaders at the local level due to

the role that local authorities play in governance processes in the members states in east

Africa, in the discussions on a Customs Union and Common market EALGA sensitized their

membership in the implications of the processes and had meeting especially amongst

councils at the border areas to explore opportunities and to develop synergies.

Engagement with EALGA as part of the dialogue process would bring the voice of local

authorities more directly in the integration process. To the extent that they already act as

the umbrella of national local authority associations in the region; have a physical presence

in Arusha, the community headquarters and a full-time Secretary General based at Arusha,

EALGA would neatly fit within the category of other interest groups envisaged by the EAC

Treaty

EATUC

The East African Trade Union Confederation was formed in 1988 as an umbrella for

national trade union centres in East Africa, its members are the umbrella trade union

centres for Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. These are the National Trade

28

Union Federations(COSYBU) from Burundi; Central Organisations of Trade Unions( (COTU-K)

from Kenya; the National Organisation of Trade Unions (NOTU) from Uganda; Zanzibar Trade

Union Congress (ZATUC); the Trade Union Congress of Tanzania (TUCTA) and CESTRAR

from Rwanda.

Since its formation EATUC has sought to galvanise the trade union voice to ensure it is united

and speaks with one voice on issues relevant to its members. EATUC has engaged on the EAC

processes and engaged various EAC institutions. In the run up to the adoption of the East African

Community Common Market Protocol EATUC led the development of a Social Dialogue

Charter highlighting key social aspects of a Common Market within the East African

Community. EATUC has offices in Arusha and also observer status with the EAC and would be

natural party to involve in the envisaged dialogue between EAC and various interest groups.

Professional bodies

The Treaty at Article 129 specifically calls for strengthening of and linkages amongst

professional bodies of their member states. These are bodies that represent the interest of

members of the various professions. Amongst the most active such professional body

within the EAC context is the lawyers’ federation. However, the reference to professional

bodies include those responsible for all the various professions within the region ranging

from teachers, doctors, engineers, nurses and the rest of the profession. The necessity for

having this category as distinct is first to give space for various professionals through their

representative institutions to contribute to the integration profession and to make a

distinction between professional groups and civil society more generally. Within East

Africa, an example of a professional body that should be included in the dialogue process is

the East African Law Society, an umbrella body based in Arusha representing the interests

of all lawyers within the EAC region and whose members draw from lawyers who are

members of the national bar associations.

Faith Based Groups

Religious organisations play an important role in any society. Within the East African

region while religious bodies have continued to undertake their traditional role of spiritual

29

nourishment, they have either directly or through specific institutions they have created

have increasingly contributed to the democratisation and development process. They are

very actively at the national level and need to be brought on board in the dialogue process

at the regional level. This process should recognise the diversity of faiths including

traditional religious institutions and ensure that they are identified and incorporated into

the dialogue process.

Political Parties

As the process of EAC regional integration has progressed, so have efforts to bring on board

various shades of opinion in society. While within the initial phases of the integration

process, saw limited involvement of Political parties, in the area of election of

representatives to the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA), parties have been the

ones proposing members for election to EALA in most instances, however this remained

the main and in many cases the only avenue for the involvement of parties in regional

integration activities. As the debate of deepening political federation has gained

momentum within EAC, the role of political parties has come into sharper focus. With the

existence of a Deputy Secretary General in charge of political parties, structured efforts to

reach out to political parties have been undertaken. On 15th-16th September 2011, the first

consultative meeting of political parties was organised by the EAC and held in Nairobi. The

main aim of the meeting was to explore modalities for enhancing the role and involvement

and parties in regional integration discourse. The meeting recommended, amongst other

issues that a regular framework for meeting by political parties be structured and

institutionalised within EAC complete with follow up mechanisms.

There is need for consideration of dialogue with political parties as part of the EAC

integration process. This requires two track-approaches. In the first instance the

consultative meetings amongst political parties in the region should be institutionalised to

provide structured mechanism for parties and the EAC to dialogue. Secondly consideration

should be made for inviting representatives from the regional forum of parties once

constituted to attend the dialogue meeting between EAC, Partner states, Civil Society and

30

Private Sector under the category of other interest groups. This is so as to widen the groups

that attend the dialogue meetings

2.4 Acquisition of Observer Status in the EAC

So far the main avenue through which non-state actors can engage in the EAC programmes

including official dialogues is to acquire observer status. Not all NSAs can be granted

observer status as there are rules to adhere to. In the case of CSOs and PSOs, granting of

observer status is the prerogative of the Council (see Treaty Article 3.5).

Detailed rules of observer status were developed in 2001 including criteria and process for

receiving observer status. The application must be in writing and is submitted to EAC

Secretary General stating reasons for seeking observer status and objectives of the

organisation. When applying for observer status, the applicant must also append its copy of

constitution and application is then circulated to all partner states and then put on the

agenda of the Council. Application must be submitted at least six months before

consideration. To be eligible, the organisation should meet the following criteria:

i) Acceptance of the fundamental principles underlying the East African Community;

ii) Have interest in the fundamental and operational principles of the East African

Community;

iii) Constitution towards the strengthening of regional integration in East Africa; and

iv) Have ability to enhance development partnership.

v) Have objectives of common interest to the Partner States;

vi) Have activities which bear a regional dimension with the organisation being

registered in each of the Partner States;

vii) In its regional activities the organisation should have a track record of at least three

years of active operation.

Currently, the following organisations have been granted observer status:

31

• East African Business Council (EABC)

• East African Trade Union Council (EATUC)

• East African Centre for Constitutional Development (Kituo cha Katiba)

• East African Magistrates' and Judges Association (EAMJA)

• East African Book Development Association

• East Africa Law Society (EALS)

• East African Farmers Federation

• East African Fine Coffees Association.

• Association of Professional Societies in East Africa (APSEA)

• East African Confederation of Informal Sector Organisations(CISO).

• The Eastern African Sub-Regional Support Initiative for the Advancement of Women

(EASSI)

As experience has shown, it is not enough to be granted observer status to participate more

effectively in the EAC processes. The Grant of observer status has the following

entitlements:

� Observers may be invited to be present for official opening and closing of all the

meetings of the Community.

� Observers may be invited to attend meetings of the organs of the Community

dealing with a subject in which they are concerned.

� Observers may, with the express authority of the Chairperson, participate in the

proceedings of the meeting to which they are invited.

� Observers may at the request of the Chairperson of a meeting, make a statement on

a matter of particular concern to them: provided that the text of such statement

shall have been furnished to the Chairperson of the meeting through the Secretary

General before it is made.

� The Chairperson of a meeting may give the observers an opportunity to reply to

questions which may be directly addressed to them in a meeting.

� Observers shall not have a right to vote.

32

� An observer may have access to the documents of the Community provided that

they are not of a confidential nature and are dealing with matters of interest to the

observer concerned.

2.5Private Sector and Civil Society Engagement Limitations

Against what appears as impressive performance by the two Departments in charge of civil

society and private sector, both Departments face a number of challenges including lack of

human and financial resources and capacity to support civil society and private sector

advocacy activities. Each of the departments are one person staffed, leading to reference to

them as desks and not departments. It is a huge limitation since some of the issues stall

when the relevant officers have travelled as there is no human resources within the

departments to follow up on civil society and private sector engagement issues.

Despite continued engagement of the private sector in EAC processes, a clear rule-based

framework on how the private sector is part of the EAC decision making process is lacking.

Dependency on donor support is also significant. For instance, the Business Climate Index

(BCI) surveys conducted in 2008 have not been conducted again after funding from GTZ

ended for that activity. The EABC also faces the challenge of representation. According to

results of national consultations, it is largely perceived as an organisation for the interest of

blue-chip companies and fails to represent the interest of small and medium enterprises,

which form over 75 percent of private sector in EAC. It has also been argued that the

reason SMEs lack effective representation at the EABC is because they are not well

organized at the national level and because of their low awareness of the existence of EABC.

Unlike the private sector which is relatively more organised around EABC that has been in

existence since 1997, civil society has performed below average of their expected role. Save

for the limitations of having to be granted observer status, most civil society are not

organised to play their role meaningfully. Besides, their participation on EAC issues at the

regional level has been limited due for a long time to lack of an overall regional anchor. The

EACSOF which is supposed to be the channel through the EAC is still at its embryonic stage

and does not have as yet the observer status.

33

Mostly, the engagement of civil society on EAC affairs has remained at the informal stage in

which civil society are episodically invited to conferences and workshops. Other than the

lack of an organised structure, the other main problem the EAC faces in incorporating civil

society in its activities are the diverse nature of civil society character and the non-

streamlined activities they engage in. Civil society tends to work on what is the current hot

issue with only very few specialised civil society on specific issues.

Despite these challenges, some countries like Rwanda have shown good practice in

organising civil society through its Rwanda Civil Society Platform, a model which other

Partner States could replicate. Rwanda has also proposed a national way to deal with the

problem of civil society dependence on donors and has recently drafted a Bill seeking to

have civil society supported by the state.

At the national level, civil society in all Partner States has no structured engagement with

the public in the design of public-private dialogue which exists for most private sector and

government. The only good practice which has proven that the trio –civil society, private

sector and the state –can work together is the experience of EPA negotiations. The Cotonou

Agreement on which EPA was founded mandates the state to consult with civil society and

private sector in developing national negotiation positions prior to regional negotiation

forums (RNF). Even at the RNF, it is a requirement that a country’s delegation comprises of

government, private sector and civil society. This experience is worth copying even in the

proposed dialogue framework.

It has been argued that the EACSOF thematic areas have overlapping focus and should be

synchronised and streamlined. In the design of EACSOF, it is supposed to create national

chapters but these have not been created yet. Some Partner States have lose CSO

networks/associations that are functional, weak, ad hoc, lack coordination; some work

around EACSOF thematic areas and are sometimes invited to dialogue with government to

build national positions. Prior to creating EACSOF national chapters, some of the existing

34

CSO Associations/Networks have expressed fear of survival if they join the proposed

EACSOF National Chapters (see appendix 2).

Even though civil society continues to play a significant developmental role within the

region, it is faced with a number of institutional, structural and capacity challenges. These

include their narrow focus as most civil society’s work encompasses broad and non-

specialised areas. They also suffer from negative perception both by the state and the

private sector; suffer from inadequate institutional and technical capacity to engage

constructively in debates around integration. The majority of civil society organisations

have weak internal structures and inadequate corporate governance structures. Also, civil

society actors have poor requisite management knowledge and skills competencies to

effectively implement their interventions. In addition, collaboration among civil society

within the region is weak. Whereas there are networks and umbrella organisations

functional in the region, competition over dwindling donor funding among network

members fosters adversarial relationships rather than collaboration and complementarity.

This situation has resulted in the duplication of efforts and initiatives. Yet one could see

that over the years, a number of CSOs in the region have been involved in exemplary

initiatives e.g. in EPA negotiations but the extent to which these initiatives inform or

influence policy remains intangible and in many cases not measured. Due to financial and

skills capacity constraints most interventions that CSOs implement are not structured to

influence policy and their advocacy cannot be sustained since it is mostly dependent on

donor funding. Lastly, civil society also suffers from lack of information flow which is

closely tied to lack of documentation of their works and influences.

35

CHAPTER THREE

COMPARATIVE EXPERIENCE AND BEST PRACTICE IN DIALOGUE WITH

CIVIL SOCIETY AND PRIVATE SECTOR

The purpose of this Chapter is to discuss options for establishing Public-Private Dialogue

and to discuss the key criteria for such dialogue. In doing do, it undertakes a literature

review of the experiences and dialogue structures for several regional and international

processes in other similar regional arrangements and organisations in an attempt to isolate

good practices that could be replicated within EAC in the development of a Dialogue

Framework.

3.1 Literature Review and Findings

Despite the stated objectives of the EAC Treaty, the level of involvement of civil society and

private sector in regional integration processes is still minimal. In addition, there is lack of

structures and mechanisms for constructive and sustained dialogue and consultation

between EAC, civil society and the private sector. This study in proposing mechanisms for

such a framework cannot has relied on dialogue practices in other regions and

international processes as evidenced from literature.

There is a paucity of writing on the EAC integration process generally, especially from the

perspective of the engagement of the private sector and civil society in regional integration

process and their linkages and relationship with the EAC and its organs. To develop a

proper framework, it is important to reconsider and learn from the experiences of the

defunct EAC Treaty with particular focus on the assessment of the non-involvement of

CSOs and private sector and the dominating authority exercised by the government.

Mohammed Mamdani in an unpublished article, “The East African Federation: Challenges

for the Future”, presented in June 2011 during the EALA 10th Anniversary symposium

captures succinctly the events leading to the collapse of the original EAC and points to the

failure to involve CSOs and private sector as critical factors that led to the collapse.

36

Mamdani’s summary is similar to the discussions in a report by Edwin Mtei, and also in the

Umbritch Report and Mediation Agreement.

Rok Ajulu has edited a book, The Making of a Region: The Revival of the East African

Community, which contains useful articles on the EAC integration process. In that book

Fred Jonyo discusses the role of CSOs in EAC integration process, providing useful

historical and analytical information on CSO involvement in the EAC integration process.

Similar articles towards this end include that by Karuti Kanyinga and others published in

1994 and titled The new local level politics in East Africa and a background paper written in

2003 by Teun van Djik and titled “Background Paper: Civil Society Participation Within the

EAC.” This latter paper based on the provisions of the Treaty sought to propose

mechanisms for involvement of CSOs in regional integration, specifically proposing

selection criteria for CSOs to be engaged in regional integration. It also made a case for the

establishment of an Economic and Social Council(ECOSOC) along the model of the

European Union(EU).

Particularly relevant for this assignment is a study report prepared in October 2010 by

Morris Odhiambo for Kituo Cha Katiba. The report, Towards Greater Civil Society

Participation in the East African Community: Challenges and Prospects,” analyses the

existing framework for CSO participation in EAC integration both within the context of the

rules of granting observer status and the structure and operations of the East African Civil

Society Forum (EACSOF). The assessments and conclusions by the study are extremely

informative to the present process of designing a dialogue framework.

The issues that the assignment sought to respond to is how to enhance the engagement of

Civil Society and Private Sector in the EAC integration process. In a policy brief published

by ACODE in Uganda and written by OnesmusMugyenyi and Flavian Zeija, the authors

propose essential issues to consider in designing a dialogue framework. The brief, The East

African Customs Union Protocol: An Audit of the Stakeholder’s Participation in the

Negotiation Process” suggests that the key issues to address include where participation

takes place and at what stage. It calls for multi-level and multi-stakeholder participation in

37

the EAC integration process, a review of the rules of accreditation, establishment of

consultation structures and proactive action by civil society and private sector.

Comparative literature on CSOs and Private Sector involvement in public policy and

regional integration from outside the region form source of information for best practice in

engagement processes. Mr. Reinhard Palm in a report published in 2011 by GIZ, Private

Sector Involvement in African Regional Economic Integration, makes the case that policy

formulation and making at the regional level is complex and the numbers of stakeholders

to be involved is large. The study based on review of private sector involvement within

SADC, EAC and ECOWAS demonstrates the existing range of avenues for private sector

engagement in regional integration from informal individual meetings to highly structured

Public-Private-Dialogues to Public-Private-Partnerships and several Private Sector

Development initiatives. The overall conclusion however is that none of the three RECs has

a defined policy for what decision at what stage of the process and which kind of private

sector organisation has to be involved and has a voice in the decision making process. This

assessment is true for both private sector and civil society and is a gap that the present

assignment seeks to fill within the context of the East African Community.

In proposing a framework for engagement, this background should be informative and

comparative analysis of the current avenues for the involvement of civil society and private

sector within several notable regional and international processes is essential. The table

below captures the findings on the options for involvement of civil society and private

sector.

Table 1: CSO-PSO Interaction in various Regional and International Processes

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

a) African Union (AU)

A Union of 54 states; was

established in 2002 as a

successor to the Organisation

of African Unity (OAU). One

of the broad objectives of the

Union is the promotion of

democratic principles and

institutions, popular

participation and good

governance. The important

Organ of the Union relating to

non-state actors is the

Economic, Social and Cultural

Council (ECOSOCC).

Article 4 (c) of the AU Treaty provides

for citizen participation and Articles 5

and 22 of the Treaty establishes

Economic, Social and Cultural Council

(ECOSOCC) as one of the organs of the

Union to promote the participation of

African civil society in the

implementation of the policies and

programmes of the Union.

Article 2 of the ECOSOCC Statutes sets

out one of objectives to promote

continuous dialogue between the

Union and all segments of the African

people on issues concerning Africa;

forging strong partnerships between

governments and all segments of the

civil society; promoting participation

of African civil society in the

implementation of the policies and

ECOSOCC: The ECOSOCC was established to give CSOs a voice

within the AU institutions and decision-making processes; it is

made up of civil society organizations from a wide range of

sectors including labour, business and professional groups,

service providers and policy think tanks, both from within Africa

and the African Diaspora.

OBSERVER STATUS: Other than being members of ECOSOCC,

non-state actors may also apply for observer status with the AU

Commission. Those with observer status may submit

documentation and speak at the Commission’s sessions.

Organizations seeking observer status must be registered in an

African state, managed by a majority of African citizens or

Diaspora, and must derive at least two-thirds of their income

from membership contributions. Such organizations are required

to hold regular consultations with the AU and submit a report

every three years on their cooperation with the AU. They have

access to the open sessions of Summit meetings, and may be

invited to participate in closed meetings of relevance to them.

PRE-SUMMIT NGO FORUM: An African NGO forum; usually

39

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

programmes of the Union. organised by the African Centre for Human Rights and

Development (ACHRD) in advance of each African Commission

session. NGOs are often co-opted by the Commission to

contribute to the work of its special mechanisms (special

rapporteurs and working groups) or to help in organising

seminars and many of the important documents adopted by the

Commission have been drafted with the assistance of the NGOs.

INDEPENDENT ADVOCACY: Various NSAs may undertake

independent advocacy efforts on policy issues in the AU. Some

examples include hosting NGO forums to facilitate CSO

participation in the ACHRD; monitoring trade (Africa Trade

Network (ATN)); providing alternative/shadow reports e.t.c.

Further, organizations, which may not necessarily have observer

status, may seek accreditation to participate in a summit

(restricted the opening or closing sessions) but this provides an

opportunity to lobby delegates on various issues.

CAADP: Since agriculture is a broad sector that embraces many

NSAs such as farmers, agribusinesses, producer organizations,

and CSOs, the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development

Programme (CAADP) recognizes that in order to transform

African agriculture, it is imperative to build broad and inclusive

40

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

coalitions committed to improving the sector’s policies,

programming and institutions, hence, State and Non State Actors

must work together in partnership.

THE AFRICAN BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE: The Roundtable was set

up by the African Development Bank Group (ADB) in 1990 as a

continent-wide association of businesses and business leaders

meant to foster African private sector-led economic growth,

social development, regional economic integration and

sustainable economic development of Africa. It organizes annual

business Summits on regional and continental levels along its

objectives.

b) Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)

COMESA started with a PTA

Treaty signed in 1981 in

Lusaka.

Article 18 of the Treaty provides a

link and facilitates dialogue between

the business community Committee,

The region’s strategy of trade, investment and development

integration calls for involvement of the private sector plays a

central role. The Secretariat together with governments arecalled

41

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

other interest groups and organs of

the Common Market.

Articles 4(3)(b) and 151, the Treaty

calls on Member States to provide an

enabling environment for the private

sector to take full advantage of the

Common Market (a) to promote a

continuous dialogue with the private

sector organs nationally and

regionally to help create an improved

business environment for the

implementation of agreed decisions

in all economic sectors; and (b) to

participate actively in improving the

policies, regulations and institutions

that affect them so as to increase

confidence in policy reforms, raise

productivity and lower costs at

enterprise levels.

Article 155 calls on member states to

create an enabling environment for

the effective participation of women

upon to create the space and environment for private sector

participation in economic integration process.

COMESA BUSINESS COUNCIL: The COMESA Business Council is a

member-based private sector institution of the COMESA. It was

established to play the key role of a key platform for advocacy in

the development, progress of the private sector in their

respective economies. Chapter 23 and 24 of the COMESA Treaty

mandates member states to develop private sector and enhance

the visibility and participation of women in business and policy

dialogue.

42

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

in Common Market trade and

development activities.

c) East African Community (EAC)

Founded with a Treaty signed

in 1999. The EAC aims at

widening and deepening co-

operation among the partner

states and other regional

economic communities in,

among others, political,

economic and social fields for

their mutual benefit. One of

the principles that govern the

operation of the community

includes ensuring people-

centred and market driven

cooperation.

Article 127 of the EAC Treaty calls for

partner states to create an enabling

environment and promote continuous

dialogue with civil society. Article

5(3) mentions the enhancement and

strengthening of partnerships with

the private sector and civil society in

order to achieve sustainable socio-

economic and political development

as an objective of the community.

OBSERVER STATUS: In order to have observer status at the EAC,

the organization should have objectives of common interest to

the Partner States; it’s activities should bear a regional

dimension with the organization being registered in each of the

Partner States and it should further have a track record of at least

three years of active operation.

EACSOF:This is an autonomous umbrella body of CSOs in EAC,

with the primary objective of building a critical mass of

knowledgeable and empowered CSOs in the region, in order to

foster their confidence and capacity in articulating grassroots

needs and interests to the EAC and its various organs,

institutions and agencies. Works towards strengthening and

institutionalizing a relationship between East African CSOs and

the EAC through an annual General Assembly for members of

EACSOF with the purpose of submitting recommendations to

East African ministers and Heads of State on various thematic

issues.

INDEPENDENT ADVOCACY: Just as with the AU, it is possible for

Civil Society Organizations to undertake independent advocacy

43

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

on various issues including advocacy on extension of the

jurisdiction of the EACJ (EALS); drafting of the Regional HIV AIDS

law (Taskforce); drafting the East African Declaration on Gender

Equality (EASSI); drafting a Bill of Rights for East Africa (Kituo

cha Katiba).

EABC:The Business Council was established in 1997 to facilitate

private sector participation in the integration process of the EAC.

Engages members in forming policy positions and lobbies for

policy change through a structured dialogue with EAC organs.

This strategy is accompanied by information dissemination to

various stakeholders and media. EABC has been granted

Observer Status at the EAC.

d) Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)

Created in 1975 to promote

regional economic

integration and to enhance

close cooperation among its

member states. One of the

organs of ECOWAS is an

Economic and Social Council.

Article 81 and 82 of the Treaty calls

for States to co-operate with regional

NGO and voluntary development

organisations as well as socio-

economic organizations and

associations in order to encourage the

involvement of the peoples of the

region in the process of economic

integration and mobilise their

FORUM OF ASSOCIATIONS RECOGNISED BY ECOWAS (): FARE

was created by ECOWAS to bridge the gap between civil society

organisations and the regional economic community. The

association has a membership base of about 30 CSOs that

represent the different constituents of civil society in the region.

ECOWAS EARLY WARNING SYSTEM: Established as a mechanism

to mobilise CSOs for data collection and analysis for the

prevention and resolution of conflicts in its nascent stage before

they degenerate into violent conflicts.

44

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

technical, material and financial

support. To this end, the Community

shall set up a mechanism for

consultation with such socioeconomic

organisations and associations.

WEST AFRICAN CIVIL SOCIETY FORUM: The idea of creating the

WACSOF was based on the need to create an institutionalized

dialogue between regional civil society organization (CSOs) and

the ECOWAS Secretariat. It was founded in 2003 as a network of

civil society organisations from the 15 ECOWAS states. The

members are from diverse backgrounds with experience in peace

building, education, health, democracy, human rights, and

gender. It involves civil society in the process of elaborating,

implementing, monitoring and evaluating political, security,

economic, social and cultural programmes of ECOWAS.

e) Southern Africa Development Community (SADC)

Founded in 1980 under

Lusaka Declaration with

Treaty signed in 1992 in

Windhoek.

Article 16A and 23 (3)(b) of the SADC

Treaty calls for involvement of the

people and key stakeholders of the

Region in the process of regional

integration. One of the important

Organs of SADC promoting CSO

participation is the SADC National

Committees.

Participation of CSOs is two-fold: one is through SADC National

Committees established by Article 16A of the Treaty, which

requires the participation of Civil Society in the National

Committees while the alternative is directly through the SADC

council of NGOs (SADC-CNGOs) formed in 1998 to facilitate

meaningful engagement of the people of the region with SADC

Secretariat at regional level, and with the Member States at

national level through national NGO umbrella bodies. The latter

meets a week before the Summit/Troika meeting. In the case of

the latter, discussions are usually held with Senior Officials with

a view to inputting CSO views and influencing the Summit/

45

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

Troika agenda.

There is also the SADC Civil Society Forum which provides space

where NGOs, donors, churches, trade unions, social movements

and other civil societies to come together to stimulate discussion

and act collaboratively on a wide range of development issues

affecting the region. The CS Forum is held during the same time

as the Heads of States Summit in an effort to enable CS input into

Summit resolutions.

f) Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)

Created in 1996 to supersede

the Intergovernmental

Authority on Drought and

Development and revitalised

into a fully-fledged regional

political, economic,

development, trade and

security entity similar to

SADC and ECOWAS.

Article 2.3 of the IGAD Khartoum

Declaration of the 8th Summit of

Heads of State encourages the

establishment of regional associations

of professional unions, chambers of

industry and commerce,

parliamentarian unions and non-

governmental organizations and civil

societies of member states as

important players in issues related to

fundamental freedoms. It directs the

IGAD Secretariat to enhance their

contribution to the effort of

IGAD NGO and Civil Society Forum: The IGAD Civil Society

forum was established in 2003, however; very little activity has

been carried out since then. In its Khartoum Declaration, the 8th

Summit of Heads of State and Government of the

Intergovernmental Authority on Development drew attention to

the aspirations of the people of the region for stronger and

cohesive unity transcending cultural, ideological, ethnic and

national differences, and recommended a number of concrete

measures to be taken by Member States, including encouraging

establishment of regional associations of non state actors as

important players in issues related to fundamental freedoms.

46

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

promoting participatory democracy

across the region.

g) European Union

The EU is founded on a series

of legal treaties between its

member states. The first

treaty, which established the

European Economic

Community was signed in

Rome in 1957. There have

been many subsequent

treaties - the Single European

Act (1986), the Treaty of

Maastricht (1992), the Treaty

of Amsterdam (1997), Treaty

of Nice (2001) and the Treaty

of Lisbon (2007), which was

rejected at a referendum in

Ireland in 2008 but was

subsequently ratified

following a second, successful

referendum in Ireland, and

An important institution of

significance to the participation of

civil society and the business

community is the European Economic

and Social Committee (ECOSOC), set

up under the Treaty of Rome (Articles

193-198, now Articles 257-262) as an

advisory body. Its members are

appointed by the Council of the

European Union and represent three

groups: employers, workers and

various interest groups. ECOSOC

works in six

sections/committees/clusters, each of

which reports on the European

Commission proposal referred to it.

The clusters deal with Economic and

Monetary Union and Economic and

Social Cohesion; Single Market,

ECOSOC is the only way for Europe's interest groups to have a

formal and institutionalised say on draft EU legislation. It exists

to channel the views of these vital interest groups to the larger

EU institutions. The involvement of European society in its very

broadest sense is thus at the heart of the European decision-

making process. It is interesting to contrast this role with that of

the European Parliament, which represents individual citizens

rather than interest groups. The ECOSOC is therefore highly

complementary.

The three groups making up ECOSOC are:

Employers’ Group – Group I: Has 114 members, and is made up

of entrepreneurs and representatives of entrepreneur

associations working in industry, commerce, services and

agriculture in the 27 Member States of the EU. These are women

and men involved in the business world and in touch with the

realities of everyday life who are willing to put their experience

to use to further the European venture.

Workers Group –Group II: This group comprises representatives

47

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

the Lisbon Treaty came into

force in December 2009.

Production and consumption;

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and

the Information Society; Employment,

Social Affairs and citizenship;

Agriculture, Rural Development and

the Environment; and, External

Relations. Both the Council and the

Commission are obliged under the

Treaty of Rome to consult ECOSOC in

these policy areas. Proposals for

legislation are drawn up by the

European Commission. As laid down

in the Treaties, in a large number of

policy areas these proposals have to

be referred to the ECOSOC. The

Committee issues its collective view

in the form of an opinion, which is

then published in the EU's Official

Journal. This is often of great use to

the Council of Ministers because it

knows that if the EESC can find broad

agreement in its position, then this is

from national trade unions, confederations and sectoral

federations. Its members represent over 80 trade union

organisations – the vast majority of them affiliated to the

European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) or its sectoral

federations.

Various Interests –Group III: This group has a unique feature in

its identity. Its Members are drawn from: Academia (scientists,

economists, sociologists, etc.); Citizens’ Participation and

Empowerment; Consumers; Civil Society Development;

Environment, Heritage & Sustainable Development; Farming,

Agro-industry, Fisheries and Forestry; Family and Voluntary

organisations; Human Rights (anti-discrimination, children,

youth, women and gender equality issues, minority, migrant,

marginalised groups, persons with disability and the elderly);

Professions (lawyers, medical doctors, architects,

engineers,pharmacists, journalists, etc.); Social Economy

(cooperatives, mutualities, associations, charities and

foundations); and, Small, Medium-sized Enterprises and Crafts.

These groups are bound together by their sense of duty towards

the large proportion of the EU population whose interests they

represent. This sense of duty has always inspired the group to

48

Description and Objectives Legal basis for CSO/PSO

Participation

Existing networks and spaces for private Sector and Civil

Society participation

likely to be a common-sense response

that will work on the ground.

call for social and economic players to be effectively involved in

the shaping of EU decisions. The shared goal is to achieve real

economic, social and participatory democracy in the EU.

What is particularly distinctive about the ECOSOC is that it is a

non-political organization, and exists to give advice on a wide

range of practical matters. The Committee's search for

compromise-based solutions to problematic issues makes it

unique.

h) EU-ACP Regional Bloc (for Economic Partnership Agreement)

This is a regional integration

arrangement between the

European Union and their

former colonies from Africa,

Caribbean and Pacific Islands

(ACP-EU) aimed at fostering

this relationship on the fronts

of trade, politics and

development.

Express and mandatory provision

that non-state actors in their various

forms have to participate in the

process of developing national

negotiation positions; they must also

be part of the regional negotiations

and harmonisation of positions. This

participation is guaranteed without

non-state actors having to be granted

observer status.

KEPLOTRADE from Kenya provides a typical example of how this

requirement was operationalised. It also necessitated the

creation of Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA) and Kenya

Civil Society Alliance (KCSA) for purposes of representing views

from the diverse range of affiliated members.

i) United Nations

The rightful avenue through with the

business community and civil society

participate in UN decision-making

process is through the Economic And

Social Council

(ECOSOC).Stakeholders’ participation

in ECOSOC is through “Consultative

Status”. Consultative Status has its

foundation in Article 71 of Chapter 10

of the United Nations Charter, which

states that "The Economic and Social

Council may make suitable

arrangements for consultation with

non-governmental organizations

which are concerned with matters

within its competence. Such

arrangements may be made with

international organizations and,

where appropriate, with national

organizations after consultation with

the Member of the United Nations

concerned."

ECOSOC Resolution 1296 (XLIV) in

ECOSOC: This is one of the six principal organs of the United

Nations and it is responsible for the coordination of the

economic, social and related work of 14 UN specialized agencies,

its functional commissions and five regional commissions. It

serves as the central forum for discussing international economic

and social issues, and for formulating policy recommendations

addressed to Member States and the United Nations system.

In 1948, shortly after the founding of the United Nations, there

were 45 NGOs in Consultative Status, mostly large international

organizations. Currently there are 3382 NGOs in consultative

status with the ECOSOC, and some 400 NGOs accredited to the

Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD).

The criteria for NGO accreditation to Consultative Status have

been revised several times, most recently in 1996 in ECOSOC

Resolution 1996/31. This Resolution grants different rights for

participation in ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies including

rights to United Nations passes, to speak at designated meetings,

and to have documents translated and circulated as official UN

documents. There are three classes of Consultative Status defined

by 1996/31, General, Special& Roster.

50

1968 defines the criteria and rights

associated with Consultative Status

with NGOs.

3.2 Analysis of the Experience of Non-State Actors’ Dialogue Frameworks

in various Regional and International Processes

From the above table it is evident that there are several options for involvement of private

sector and civil society in regional and international processes. However the key ones are

grant of observer status, grant of consultative status or creation of their incorporation into

an Economic and Social Council. The discussion of the current observer status within east

Africa clearly demonstrates the limitation of this approach

The UN provides a good model for grant of consultative status to Civil Society. Through

such a grant, Civil Society participates in the deliberations of the UN as active participants

and not just as observers. Others like the WTO limits NGO participation to receiving

documents, attending symposia on specific issues, submitting memoranda on specific

issues and participation in national processes. Although agreeing to closer consultation and

cooperation with NGOs rejects their formal participation in WTO processes.

A more robust and experienced dialogue framework exists in the European Union. The

European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) set up under the Treaty of Rome as the

only consultative body at European Union level that gives the Commission, the Council and

the Parliament the points of view of the people "on the ground". The Committee provides

framework for the formal and institutionalized consultation of interest groups and gives

practical advice to the EU on a wide range of matters. The membership of EESC is made up

of representatives of Europe's employers' organizations, trade unions, farmers, consumer

groups, professional associations, and so on. There are 344 members to EESC, divided

between the twenty seven Member States according to a given quota. These members

represent three interest groups: Employers, Workers and Various Interest Groups. All are

appointed by the Council of Ministers following proposals made by the government of the

respective Member State. They receive allowances to cover their travel expenses and

accommodation when attending meetings, but are not otherwise paid. The Committee works to

find compromises between the groups represented in it. These compromises concern draft

legislation on a wide range of controversial issues. The Committee's search for

52

compromise-based solutions to problematic issues makes it unique. Topics referred to the

EESC range from trans-European transport networks to public health policy, to name just

two. This clearly means that all sides must be ready to engage in dialogue and give ground

to some degree. EESC has six clusters that consider issues raised to it and report to the

Council and Commission. The Treaty of Rome obliges consultation of EESC on the six areas

Still on the EESC, how it works in practice is that it receives proposals for legislation after

they are drawn up by the European Commission. As laid down in the Treaties, in a large

number of policy areas these proposals have to be referred to the EESC to give its collective

view, which is published in the EU's Official Journal. This is often of great use to the Council

of Ministers because it knows that if the EESC can find broad agreement in its position

given its diversity, then this is likely to be a common-sense response that will work on the

ground. While the EESC is not a lobby group (but has lobbyists in it) it can be pro-active. It

can issue opinions on its own initiative if it feels that a given problem or issue needs

looking into by the larger institutions. An instance of this is the Committee's work in

highlighting obstacles to the smooth running of the EU single market. Finally, in terms of

the actual impact of EESC, the Committee has had a key effect on many areas of EU activity

since it was set up over forty years ago by the Treaty of Rome. This is particularly the case

regarding proposals in the fields of workplace and agricultural policy. One example is the

European Social Charter, which was based very closely on a document drawn up by the

Committee. Proof of the practical value of compromise within the Committee is the fact that

the Charter was immediately acceptable to all but one of the Member State governments

Coming to Africa, we have look at the AU experience. Under the AU is established an

Economic Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC) as organ of the Union to promote

participation of CSOs. It is made up of CSOs from diverse sectors. The ECOSOCC has an

advisory status to the AU and African Civil Society organisations are granted membership

to this Council thus elevating their engagement within the AU from mere observers to

active participants with advisory role to the continental integration process. Coalition of

civil society for the African Union meets two months before the AU Summit and prepares

its recommendations that are sent to the AU by way of a Communiqué. After the Summit,

53

decisions pronounced are audited by civil society within the respective states. A key

success of popular participation (grassroots movement and mobilization) helped to

influence the process of establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Still on AU, during 2000, civil society organisations were invited to participate in the

unification of Africa through the Economic, Social and Cultural Council of the African Union

(ECOSOCC). Under the ECOSOCC, civil society is allowed to carry out independent advocacy

and is granted space to participate in African business roundtable.

In West Africa, there is the West African Civil Society Forum (WACSOF) founded in 2003 for

institutionalized dialogue between CSOs and ECOWAS secretariat. It involves CSOs in

elaborating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating political, social, security, economic

and cultural programmes of ECOWAS. It meets once a year prior to the Heads of State

Summit to prepare its inputs for considerations at the Summit. A notable achievement of

this group was the formulation of a Vision 2020 document by ECOWAS that WACSOF was

invited to draft and provide comments on.

In COMESA, all policy issues are passed through the Business Community which is an

intergovernmental body established under Article 7(1) (h) of the COMESA Treaty. No

organised body exist for civil society and it gives COMESA a general perception of being an

integration of markets alone and not the people. However in the recent past there are

initial efforts to organise and involve civil society.

From the analysis it is evident that observer status is the most prevalent but least effective.

This then graduates with an ECOSOC being the closest in terms of status. However at the

end of the day the levels of influence of CSOs and PSOs should be seen within the wider

context of the policy environment for operations, the levels of organisations by the CSOs

and PSOs, the issues they canvass, their reputation and their capacity. This is informed out

of the reality that in reality most regional and international processes can be influenced by

these actors while still having decisions made principally by states. Striking the balance

between improving the framework for dialogue while also addressing capacity,

54

organisation and legitimacy issues from the side of the CSOs and PSOs will be key to

success for dialogue within the EAC.

3.3 Principles of Effective Public-Private Dialogue

The principles of good practice in public-private dialogue were drawn in February 2006 at

the International Workshop on Public-Private Dialogue, organized by a cross-sectoral team

from DFID, the World Bank, the IFC and OECD Development Centre, held at the World

Bank Paris Conference Centre, and attended by over a hundred participants from thirty

countries. These principles became known as the Charter of Good Practice in using Public

Private Dialogue for Private Sector Development. In this section, consideration is made to

eleven principles that are important in anchoring the proposed EAC-PSO-CSO dialogue

framework.

Mandate, objective and institutional alignment: it is helpful to have clear statement of

objective for dialogue. Although formal or legal mandates are necessary in some political

and economic contexts, they are never a sufficient basis to establish good public-private

dialogue. Moreover, PPDs should be aligned with existing institutions so as to maximize the

institutional potential and minimize friction.

Dialogue depends on the capacity and mindset of participants, and a legal mandate is not

sufficient to create this. Nonetheless, a formal mandate is a signal that can establish

credibility, make continuity more probable, and enable dialogue to be better integrated

into an existing institutional framework.

A mandate with legal backing is especially likely to be helpful in transition economies or

countries with a strongly bureaucratic tradition. However, energy should not be diverted

into establishing a legal status at the expense of losing momentum on substantive reform

efforts.

55

Legal mandates which are too detailed carry the risk of restricting flexibility and

restraining initiatives from adapting to changing circumstances as dialogue structures may

need to change and adapt to changing times. Existing institutions should be capitalized on

as much as possible.

Structure and participation: PPD’s structures should be comprehensive yet simple and

manageable to enable participation to be both balanced and effective, and should reflect

the local private sector context. Appropriate structures can be formal, informal or a

mixture. Their design needs to take into account existing processes and institutions.

Participation of relevant representative stakeholders should be agreed on in a transparent

manner and be balanced and practicable, so as to best serve the objectives of the dialogue.

It helps to set up dialogue structures in a series of working groups and should have

umbrella Secretariat to help ensure a coherent approach to public-private dialogue,

including the shaping of an overarching policy framework.

Need for Champions of Dialogue: In order to sustain dialogue there must be champions

from both the public and private sectors, who invest in the process and drive it forward.

These champions need to be backed and supported by the stakeholders in the dialogue. It is

easier for dialogue to survive weakness of champions in the private sector than the public

sector. Dialogue should be protected from champions who are too strong, otherwise the

agenda can become too narrowly focused, or dialogue can come to depend too heavily on

individuals. While champions are required, no party to the dialogue should dominate the

dialogue either in terms of setting agenda and providing solutions.

Dialogue Facilitator: A facilitator who commands the respect of stakeholders can greatly

improve the prospects of PPD. Important qualifications for the facilitator include

negotiation skills, understanding of technical issues and an ability to converse easily with

everyone from Ministers to micro-entrepreneurs. An innovative and entrepreneurial

approach is often helpful. A difficult question is whether the facilitator should be local or

external – local knowledge is an advantage, but so is a lack of any personal baggage with

participants.

56

Dialogue Outputs: Dialogues should have outputs. The first out is the shape of structure

itself but there are also process outputs, outputs of periodic meetings and conferences,

analytical outputs or recommendations. All should contribute to agreed development

outcomes.

Outreach and communications: Enabling communication of a shared vision and

understanding through the development of a common language is essential for building

trust among stakeholders. It is important for all stakeholders to have mutual

understanding of the core motivation for communication, which depends on frequent and

iterative interactions between all parties. Dialogue should be as open-access and broadly

inclusive as feasible. This necessitates an outreach program to the reform constituency.

Elements can include use of the media, seminars, workshops, and roadshows. This also

necessitates attention to building the capacity of the partners in the dialogue to participate

in dialogue to achieve a concerted strategy to communicate reform issues through clear

and targeted messages. Transparency of process – in particular, an open approach towards

the media –is essential for outreach, and also contributes to measurement and evaluation.

Monitoring and evaluation: Dialogue structures should be embedded with a monitoring

and evaluation as a tool to manage the dialogue process and to demonstrate its purpose

and performance. While remaining flexible, user friendly and light, the monitoring and

evaluation framework adopted should provide stakeholders with the ability to monitor

internal processes and encourage transparency and accountability. To have an M&E would

therefore require identification of dialogue inputs, outputs, outcomes, impacts and

designated indicators and should be periodically reviewed by stakeholders. This

presupposes the collection of reliable data. M&E enables better overall planning and can

ignite potential advocacy, and provide both internal and external motivation to promote

more effective implementation. To this effect, before starting Dialogue, it is important to

carry out a baseline survey to enable the dialogue partners to better measure how it is

achieving its goals over time and delivering on its envisaged benefits.

57

Sub-national (Inclusivity):Public-private dialogues are desirable at all levels of decision-

making down to the most local possible level. This allows the dialogue to identify and bring

on board local issues and solutions channelled upwards to the appropriate level of

authority at which they can be solved. Local dialogue can contribute to effective

implementation of national policies. Local level dialogues can especially benefit from use of

participatory tools, capacity building initiatives, and the use of local and neutral facilitators.

Sector-specific: Sector-specific or issue-specific public-private dialogues should be

encouraged because they provide more focus, greater incentive to collaborate, and more

opportunity for action. To tackle the risk of missing the big picture sector-specific dialogues

should be linked to a broader, cross-cutting dialogue process. However, the choice of

sectors to involve in dialogue can be controversial, especially where institutions are weak.

This can be mitigated by a transparent process.

International role: Broad and inclusive public-private dialogue can effectively represent

and promote national and regional interests of both public and private actors in

international negotiations and international dialogue processes. Complex international

challenges require broad, ad hoc alliances between state and non-state actors. These

should be transparent, inclusive and open-access. Involving local partnerships at the

international level can give a more effective voice to national and regional interests by

helping public and private sectors to coordinate and thus widening their room for

manoeuvre.

Development partners: Public-private dialogue initiatives can benefit from the input and

support of donors (development partners) when their role is determined by the local

context, demand driven, and based on partnership, coordination and additionality.

58

CHAPTER FOUR

CONSULTATIVE DIALOGUE FRAMEWORK FOR PRIVATE SECTOR,

CIVIL SOCIETY AND OTHER INTEREST GROUPS IN THE EAC

INTEGRATION PROCESS

4.1 Introduction

Based on analysis, comparative and international best practice and national and regional

consultations, there is consensus on the nature of engagements required for successful

dialogue between the Community and Civil Society, Private Sector and other interest

groups. This chapter discusses the proposed dialogue process, which is principally through

an Annual Secretary General’s Forum to be convened in accordance with Article 127 of the

EAC Treaty. However, it recognises and itemises other avenues for dialogue to supplement

the forum .

4.2 Proposed Dialogue Framework

The Proposed dialogue framework envisages a forum convened annually by the Secretary

General of the East African Community. The meeting will be organised collaboratively

based on an agenda agreed upon between the private sector, civil society and the EAC

Secretariat. It requires that PSOs and CSOs be organised at the regional level through

regional apex bodies. The desirable state is to have one apex body for private sector and

another for civil society. Those bodies require to be democratic and to derive their

legitimacy from their respective sectors. At the national level, the regional apex bodies will

link through the national focal points through which national positions will be formed and

through the regional body, regional positions will be harmonized. The national focal points

will link to the national ministry responsible for EAC affairs, which will forward the agreed

positions to the EAC. Additionally, the regional position will also be submitted through the

regional body to the EAC Secretariat and the relevant EAC decision-making bodies. The

dialogue framework will, however, not be restricted to civil society and private sector only.

It will, in accordance with the provision of Article 127(4) involve other interest groups as

59

shall be identified by the Secretary General and/or as shall express interest to participate.

These will include but not be limited to Trade Unions, faith based organisations, Local

authorities, professional groups and political parties. Just like the case of civil society and

private sector, efforts shall be made to identify networks and umbrellas of such interst

groups to the extent that they exist.

The Diagram overleaf captures the envisaged framework for dialogue.

60

Figure 1. Structure for Consultative Dialogue Framework for Consultations for PSO, CSOs and Other Interest Groups

EAC SG FORUM

Regional Dialogue Platform

� Annual Forum for all groups

� Sector-wide dialogues based on

EAC Calendar of Activities

Other

BMOs

Wider Private Sector Businesses

working on wide-ranging sectors

PSO National

Focal Points

CSO National

Chapters

Wider Civil Society Organisations

working on wide-ranging sectors

National CSO

Networks

National Dialogue Platform

(Ministry of EAC Affairs)

Networks of

‘Other Interest

Groups’

Regional PSO

Representative

(EABC)

Other PSO

Regional

Umbrellas

Regional CSO

Representative

(EACSOF)

Other Regional

CSO Bodies

Regional

Professional

Bodies

Other Interest

groups

National

Professional

Bodies

4.3 Objectives of the Dialogue

The objectives of the dialogue between the civil Society, Private Sector and other interest

groups on the one hand and EAC Community on the other shall be to:

1) Allow CSOs, PSOs, other interest groups and EAC to consultatively work towards

realising the Community Objectives and promote ensure a people-centred integration

process.

2) Enhance and strengthen partnerships between CSOs and PSOs and with the EAC

3) Provide a structured framework for consultation between EAC, Partner States, Civil

society, Private Sector and other interest groups on EA integration process

4) Provide an enabling environment for PSOs , CSOs and other interest groups to

participate in the EAC integration process and discussions.

5) Establish clear and effective communication and feedback mechanisms between EAC

Organs/Institutions/Partner States and civil society organizations, private sector and

other interest groups on the EAC integration process

6) Enhance coordination and harmonization of positions by civil society ,private sector

and other interest groups in the EAC integration process

7) Strengthen the capacity of PSOs, CSOs and other interest groups to more effectively and

meaningfully engage in the EAC integration process

4.4 Principles of the Dialogue

1) Cooperation for mutual benefit: All matters for dialogue must aim at deepening

regional integration including cooperation to deal with implementation challenges.

2) Mutual respect, trust and goodwill: All partners to the dialogue shall strive to build

trust and respect for each other. It is important that all stakeholders involved exude

confidence in the dialogue structure.

3) Active and constructive Participation: This principle requires partners to the

dialogue to have adequate capacities including specialisation on the various issues of

regional integration in order to be able to engage in constructive dialogue. The principle

envisions that all parties to the dialogue(PSOs, CSOs, other interest groups and the

64

state) shall nominate officials who have expertise on the issues on which dialogue shall

be held and where such expertise lacks then there shall be provisions to build such

expertise.

4) Inclusivity: Ensures there is subsidiarity in dialogue so that as many stakeholders at

various levels are represented in the dialogue structure

5) Unity in diversity: Although partners to the dialogue play different roles on regional

integration, this principle ensures that the different roles complement each other rather

than antagonising each other in the process of deepening regional integration.

6) Accountability and feedback to stakeholders: The dialogue process shall be

transparent, representative, accountable, and must have effective and clear mechanism

of sending feedback vertically and horizontally throughout the dialogue structure.

7) Evidence-based dialogue with a focus on results: Dialogue shall be based on

evidence, sharing of necessary information and allowing for internal consultations

among the stakeholders prior to developing national positions. Where evidence shall be

required and the same is lacking then it will be mandatory to generate such evidence

including through research and capacity-building.

8) Consensus building approach: Not always will there be consensus nationally or

among partner states on issues of regional integration. However, the overriding spirit in

the dialogue shall be to strive towards building consensus including, where need be, to

build capacities to help bridge gaps on positions.

4.5 Process of Dialogue

The dialogue will take place at both the national and regional level. While the Secretary

General’s Forum to be held annually under the provisions of Article 127(4) provides the

fulcrum around which the dialogue process rotates, it is not the only avenue for dialogue.

As indicated in the figure on the dialogue framework above, the dialogue will commence at

the national level.

65

The national level dialogue will be coordinated through the Ministry responsible for EAC

affairs. It will, on the basis of the issues being discussed also involve relevant sectoral

ministries. For example, if the issue for discussion is one relating to health, then in addition

to the EAC Ministry, the Ministry of Health will take part in the dialogue two. The Ministry

responsible for EAC Affairs in the Partner States should consider organising regular and

structured roundtable discussions for consultations with Private sector, Civil society and

other relevant interest groups. In addition the Partner States should enhance the existing

PPD mechanisms and ensure they have representation of all relevant stakeholders. Civil

Society and Private Sector will require to be more organised at the national level so as to

ensure structured and meaningful dialogue with government. For private sector, the

existing arrangement of the national focal points/umbrella private sector networks leading

the dialogue with government will provide a useful entry point while seeking to include

other private sector bodies based on themes for discussion and levels of activity within the

country. The Civil society on their part will need to clarify their national networks and

coordination process to ensure that there is clarity on representation for dialogue at the

national level.

The discussions that happen at the national level should be fed to the regional process

through two channels. First, the Ministry responsible for EAC should consider the

discussions as it prepares national positions on issues for discussions at the EAC and

forward relevant recommendations to the EAC. Secondly both the CSOs and PSOs should

forward the positions to the EAC through their regional apex bodies and networks.

At the regional level, the dialogue envisaged should be continuous based on the reality that

discussions and decisions at the EAC take place continuously. This requires CSOs and PSOs

to link with these discussions and have their inputs fed into them. To do so will require that

the Secretary General shares the calendar of EAC activities to both CSOs and PSOs to enable

them prepare. Secondly that CSOs and PSOs will clarify their representation at the regional

level and designate one focal point to coordinate their interface with the EAC mainly

through the Secretariat. Thirdly that CSOs and PSOs will organise consultations with the

66

EAC on a continuous basis based on the calendar of events. Finally the process will

culminate in an annual meeting convened by the Secretary General.

4.6 Legal and Operational Issues

Implementing the dialogue framework as described in this report requires certain legal and

operational action to be undertaken both at the EAC level and within partner states. In the

first instance the legal mandate for the main dialogue mechanism proposed is already

anchored in the EAC Treaty by virtue of Article 127 of the Treaty. What is outstanding is the

formalisation of the forum, an issue that the Council spoke to at its decision

EAC/CM19/Directive 27. This report has detailed the format of such a forum and other

engagement mechanism.

Several steps will be requited at the Partner States level to operationalise the dialogue

framework. This will involve putting in place civil society frameworks for engagement on

EAC regional integration issues. As this report has detailed the levels of involvement of the

private sector in dialogue with government is more structured and enhanced in most

countries in the region. However, those for civil society are fledgling and in some cases

non-existent. The success of the dialogue framework at the regional level will depend on

the levels to which civil society get better organised and structure their relationship with

government at the national level. Support for this process by the civil society themselves

and from development partners is going to be critical.

Questions have been raised as to whether such frameworks by Civil Society should be

registered or left lose. In an ideal situation, the national coalition of NGOs, which should be

a registered Umbrella body, would provide the framework for the engagement. The reality,

however, is that this network does not exist in all the five partner states and even where

they exist have legitimacy challenges. It is advisable that the framework for the CSO

engagement be encouraged to develop organically deriving its legitimacy from below, that

is, from the membership itself. The decision as to whether to register or operate as a loose

network is one that the members will have to make. What is imperative is that whichever

67

way the decision is made, there is going to be need for rules of engagement and clarity on

the leadership and contact point to make the relationship with government clear and

structured but also to enhance quick response to issues that will arise as part of the

dialogue process.

CSOs and PSOs should also work towards developing a collective position with their

structures at national level then channelling the same to the regional level. While it is

desirable that CSOs and PSOs coordinate their positions, there are legitimate fears amongst

both groups that this should not be formalised to avoid situations where one actor bogs

down the other. Each will, thus, be able to engage at both the national and regional level as

an independent actor notwithstanding the lack of collaboration with and consultation with

the other. The flow of information shall follow the decision structures of EAC as it applies

at the moment. From Partner States and EAC Secretariat, the output of dialogues and

recommendations will be passed to Expert group meetings in the EAC Secretariat formats

before they can be considered by the Sectoral Committee for relevance. Following this, if

relevant, the proposals shall be sent to the Coordinating Committees for discussions on

budgetary implications, thereafter to the Sectoral Councils and Council of Ministers for

budgetary approval and adoption. Interventions at the Summit shall be for adoption only in

the case where Council refers the mater to summit.

The structure provides clear avenues for feedback and accountability mechanism.

However, these will depend on the ability of EAC to facilitate all the proposed dialogues.

It will thus be important to revisit and as part of that process to strengthen the EAC

Secretariat, and specifically the Departments dealing with civil society and private sector

engagements on the EAC respectively. Preliminarily, the areas that will require increased

support are in resources (human capacity, financial and technical skills) as well as effective

communication strategy.

The success of the framework will depend on the capacity of the CSO and PSO

representatives to dialogue. This requires ability to research and prepare well-reasoned

policy positions, to coordinate inputs from their members and to negotiate and lobby

68

decisions makers to accept their positions. This calls for investment in capacity building

and skills enhancement for both the PSO and CSO representative at the regional level.

4.7 The Secretary General’s Forum

The report proposes that in addition to the continuous dialogue, the Secretary General

convenes a meeting annually. The meeting, to be known as the Secretary General’s Forum

will provide an opportunity for the EAC to have structured dialogue with CSOs, PSOs and

other interest groups. The Secretary General will have to identify the other interest groups

and seek to involve them in the dialogue. These should comprise trade unions, faith based

organisations and local authorities. The Secretary General Should require each of these

groups and the CSOs and PSOs to designate their representatives to the forum. In addition

the Secretary General should invite representatives of other interest groups as shall have

been identified to participate in the dialogue process.

A dialogue committee comprising a representative from the EAC Secretariat, from Private

Sector and from Civil Society should be responsible for preparing the agenda, agreeing on

participants and overseeing logistics and conduct of the meeting. The Speaker of EALA or

their representative and the Judge President of the EACJ or their representative should be

invited to attend the forum.

4.9 Other Avenues for Dialogue with Civil Society and Private Sector

High Level meetings like the Investment Conference, EAC Forum for Ministers of Social

Development; EAC Forum on the Role of Women in Business, EAC Youth Forum amongst

many others also provides useful avenues for informal dialogue amongst the partners and

should continue. Their deliberations should be forwarded both to the Annual Secretary

General’s Forum, relevant EAC directorates within the Secretariat . Civil Society and Private

Sector will need to identify which of these other foras they want to engage in.

69

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The creation of an enabling environment for and greater involvement of CSOs and PSOs in

EAC integration processes is a mandatory requirement of the EAC Treaty. Since the revival

of the EAC integration in 1999, the Community has had mixed experiences in meeting the

Treaty stipulations. While several civil society organisations and private sector actors have

been granted observer status, their impact has been limited. To address these limitations,

other options that have been explored include attendance at high level conferences and

input into policy processes mainly by the East African Business Council (EABC) as the

umbrella private sector body. Civil Society organisations efforts have had lesser effect with

the East African Civil Society Forum (EACSOF) being in its embryonic stage and still

suffering from legitimacy challenges. Instead thematic groups like the East African Law

Society have attempted to influence the EAC integration processes. The EAC Secretariat on

its side has created a Private Sector department and a Gender and Civil Society department

within its structure to better coordinate and improve engagements with private sector and

civil society respectively.

The requirements to operatinalise the consultative dialogue framework envisaged by

Article 127 of the Treaty provides the Community with the opportunity not only to

establish the forum that the Secretary General is under a legal duty to do, but to more

broadly provide space for greater engagements by the private sector and civil society in

EAC affairs. For it is only by doing this that the EAC Community shall be truly people-

centred and private sector driven. To give effect to the content and proposals in this

document we recommend further that:

• A Dialogue Committee of the Secretary General’s Forum be immediately formed

following the adoption of these recommendations and the rules of procedure by the

70

Council with a view to convening the first Secretary General’s Annual Forum. That

forum should have the broad mandate of reviewing the status of Private Sector and

Civil Society engagement in EAC integration and the progress in the integration

process.

• The forum should be held at the country whose head is the current chair of the

summit for that year. .

• CSOs and PSOs together should be incorporated in the existing EAC fora for PSOs

and CSOs depending on mutual interest.

• The end result should be to have Civil Society and Private Sector forming single

umbrella organisations at the regional level to aid the dialogue processes. While

EABC and EACSOF exist currently, owing to inclusivity concerns, it is imperative that

in the initial stages of the dialogue, the attendance be widened to include

representation of private sector and civil society networks and umbrellas outside

EACSOF and EABC, SMEs, for example should consider forming sector-based

federations and together join the existing PSO national focal points through which

their concerns and inputs can be channelled to EABC. EACSOF, on its part should

consider establishing national focal points which draws its membership from

theme-based CSO Networks and not from individual CSO organisations.

• Both EACSOF and EABC should undertake reform of their structures and widen their

membership. Support for these processes is necessary.

• Since Dialogue need to kick-off with the existing CSO networks and mechanisms and

structures for engagement, a detailed analysis of these CSO networks and existing

national dialogue structures should be undertaken to highlight their strengths and

gaps and to encourage them to form single consultative national focal points in each

country.

• It is imperative that the dialogue process be operationalised immediately. Support

for the operationalising process will include the mapping, awareness creation on the

benefits and process of dialogue, support to dialogue meetings at the national level,

inputs into policy processes and convening of the inaugural Secretary General’s

Forum.

71

• Resource mobilisation to finance the dialogue process is critical to ensure sufficient

and sustainable resources for the dialogue process. Avenues for financing Dialogue

should include EAC Secretariat, PSOs and CSOs self-financing, development

partners.

• To ensure that the participation of the private sector and the civil society is

meaningful and substantive, this report recommends comprehensive capacity

building programme for both groups. The Civil Society and Private Sector desks of

the EAC Secretariat and development partners in collaboration with regional civil

society and Private Sector bodies can lead and support this process.

• The Secretary General should annually prepare and circulate to Civil Society and

Private Sector in the region through their networks and umbrellas the calendar of

events for EAC to enable their meaningful inputs.

• In the long run consideration should be given to establishing an Economic and Social

Committee along the lines of a similar body within the EU to act as the principal

avenue for engagement of the Civil Society and Private Sector. The Secretary

General’s Forum based on performance could be converted to the Committee over

time.

The Dialogue process should involve as many stakeholders as possible to ensure

inclusivity. This requires that a process of dissemination and awareness raising to

popularize the framework be commenced by the Secretariat. It is also important

that a monitoring and evaluation framework be put in place. This should be done as

part and parcel of a detailed implementation strategy consisting of the following

elements:

• Mapping;

• communication and feedback mechanism ;

• monitoring and evaluation;

• resource mobilization.

• Develop and implement an M& E framework.

References Appendix : Summary report of National Consultations on the Dialogue Framework

So far national consultations have been held in Burundi (13/9/11); Uganda (15/9/11); Tanzania (21/9/11); Kenya (27/9/11); and Rwanda (3/10/11). Debriefing

was also done for the relevant EAC Staff (28/09/11). There was general agreement in all the countries on the proposed DF structure agreed at the experts

meeting. Countries depict different experiences with regards to popular participation and have sets of recommendations and concerns. Outputs of these meetings

are covered here below:

Burundi Uganda Tanzania Kenya Rwanda

� PPD still at proposal stage

but only for Go’t-PSO hence

need for a mechanism to

incorporate CSOs before

implementation.

� CSO/PSO and CSO/Gov’t

relations is conflictual while

PSO/Gov’t relations is

cordial.

� How will DF be useful for

PSOs and CSOs when both

sectors have divergent

missions? Can consensus be

forced?

� Doubts feasibility of CSOs

and PSOs collaborating and

having consensus on all

issues of the Dialogue.

Antagonism is bound to be in

issues such as respect for

human rights, corporate

social responsibility, peace

and security, counterfeits,

competition policy.

� Doubts government’s

partial financial support to

Dialogue Process.

� Translation challenges limit

effective participation of

Burundians in EAC

discussions.

� Three CSOs are Board

members of EACSOF.

� EACSOF is yet to register a

NFP.

� Chamber has a working

� Mostly felt EACSOF is an

imposition…. Many CSOs

hearing of EACSOF for the

first time

� PSFU should not be

imposed on all BMOs/PSOs.

� Fear of existing networks

being subsumed in EACSOF

NFP.

� Need to mainstream gender

and marginalised sectors in

the dialogue.

� Dialogue should be

evidence-based hence need to

incorporate research.

� There is general lack of

awareness of regional

integration among CSOs.

� Openness and transparency

in dialogue is key to success.

� Pursue process of

amending rules of observer

status to make them less

limiting.

� It should be possible to use

DF in more than EAC issues

i.e. extend it to WTO, EPAs,

Tripartite etc.

� Clarify whether EAC is

pursuing rapidist or gradualist

approach to integration and

Increase awareness level of

the DF.

� EAC is a youthful region

hence need to go beyond pre-

occupation in economics,

social and gender to pursue

� Generally agreed on

possibility of state support

among other avenues

� But insistent on further

awareness prior to validation.

Undertook to do so.

� Need to further clarify

principles of dialogue and

EACSOF thematic areas.

� Tanzania National Business

Council provides a good

example how to organise

PSO engagement.

� Need for diversity of

representation at the SG

forum.

� DF should have a provision

for revision to perfect it with

implementation.

� CSOs should stop

capitalising on issues that

divide them and concentrate

on issues that unite them.

� EABC and EACSOF must

take the role of disseminating

and discussing the DF with

all their constituents.

� Relying of government

funding the DF will be tricky

hence the need to diversity

sources of financing dialogue

at its various stages.

� Should be possible to start

Dialogue through existing

structures of CSO and PSO

networks.

� DF should have a provision

� Unclear about feasibility of

CSOs and PSOs collaboration

in the Dialogue process

� CSOs reluctant to coalesce

together under one

umbrella…. Prefer status quo.

� Clarify upfront purpose for

SG forum and similar other

foras.

� DF should help address

implementation failures

� Need for participants in the

DF process to make some

token financial contributions

to process

� Definition of CSOs is lose

and need to harmonise it

across the region.

� CSOs should get more

organised to benefit from

Dialogue with other

stakeholders of the DF.

� EACSOF should have the

interest and ability to

represent civil society in their

spheres of work.

� It is not possible to pre-

determine what issues will be

discussed at pre-Summit

because each Summit

addresses different hot issues

of any particular year.

� If Summit meets more than

once a year, will we have the

same number of pre-

Summits?

� Need to synchronize all

� DF is not an imposition

from EAC but an

implementation of Treaty.

� All policy documents must

involve inputs of Partner

States hence dialoguing and

harmonising positions at

national level will be

important.

� EAC is an inter-

governmental organization

but it is also for the people

and since governments cannot

do everything and doesn’t

have monopoly of

knowledge…important to

involve NSAs.

� Principles of subsidiarity

and variable geometry are

endorsed in the Treaty and

should be reflected in the DF.

� Agreed that the validation

workshop will provide room

for further engagement.

� SMEs are not sensitised

about EABC hence the non-

inclusivity of EABC.

� Rwanda CSO Platform

provides a good practice

about how to organise CSOs

even though not all CSOs are

members of the platform.

� EPA experience is a good

practice model how CSOs-

PSOs-State can collaborate to

develop national positions

and should be copied.

73

relationship with CSOs being

one of the founders of Forum

for Strengthening of CSOs of

Burundi.

� Existing PSO-CSO

consultative structures need

strengthening.

� Fears of EACSOF NFP

replacing existing

mechanisms.

� Need for deeper awareness

of the newly-created

Dialogue structures.

� Lack of resources to

facilitate national dialogues

will weaken regional

participation.

youth agenda.

� Consider using

contemporary social media to

attract participation of the

youth in the Community

affairs.

� Parties to the dialogue

should show proof of

consulting the base.

� Clarify the process of

convening the SG forum and

ensure it will be more

representative as possible.

� If possible the DF to allow

for freedom of expression e.g.

demonstration where it is not

possible to have consensus on

important issues such

corruption and abuse of

human rights etc.

� Will the present observer

rules allow meaningful

treatment of

recommendations arising

from dialogue with non-state

actors?

� EACSOF national focal

points shouldn’t subsume

existing networks and

dialogue structures.

for revision to perfect it with

implementation.

� CSOs should stop

capitalising on issues that

divide them and concentrate

on issues that unite them.

CSO and PSO apex bodies so

in the long-run have a single

robust apex body for CSOs

and for PSOs.

� CSOs advocacy should be

mirrored on issues being

discussed and they should

identify who are their

partners at the state level for

different issues of advocacy.

� SMEs should join EABC as

a unit.

� Need to map out existing

CSO and PSO networks,

identify their challenges and

how they can be

strengthened.

� EABC formed from the

base but EACSOF formed

from the top, which explains

its challenges of

representation.

� EAC Communication

strategy is weak hence

stakeholders think EAC is

imposing issues. Need to

develop effective EAC

Communication strategy

� CSO and PSO needs in all

partner states are varied

hence the need to incorporate

principle of variable

geometry in the dialogue.

� Council should endorse

state financing of the

dialogue process.

� Capacity of Secretariat to

manage all annual PSO-CSO

fora is limited. There is need

to increase state allocation to

Secretariat to manage the

dialogue and organise all

regional meetings.

� There is a Bill proposing to

have CSOs partially funded

by the State. A good practice

that should be replicated in

other Partner States.

� At validation, need to have

further national working

groups.