The Palestine Legislative Council has passed The Community Organizations and Charitable Societies Bill (The NGO Law) in the third reading following extensive studies and consultations with experts and representatives of civil society organizations.

To date, the Law has not been signed by the President due to a disagreement on the Ministry responsible for registering these organizations.

While the PLC has insisted on the Ministry of Justice (or even the relevant ministry, depending on the nature of the organization), the Executive has maintained its position that the Ministry of Interior be the responsible address.

In the last few weeks, a public debate has erupted, reaching the point of confrontation, between the Executive and the NGO’s.

Spearheading this campaign, the Minister of Justice has given numerous interviews to the Palestinian, Israeli, and international media making a wide variety of accusations against the NGO’s.

Other “loyal pens” have also been recruited to cast doubt on the work and role of Palestinian institutions of civil society.

From questioning their loyalty as recipients of foreign funding, to selectivity and bias in reporting to suit their “patrons,” to inflated salaries, to lack of accountability and corruption, to undue “interference” in politics—the “accusations” are endless.

The NGO’s and political factions have responded, also publicly, demanding proof and rejecting these charges as being unfounded and politically motivated, or as being a defensive response by the Minister of Justice to the accusations against him by the PLC and Human Rights Organizations. The timing of this campaign was also brought into question as well as its motivation and substance. (See Forum: Statements).

Whatever the reasons, it is clear that such a domestic “battle” is in not in the national interest, and can only serve to widen the rift between the PNA and civil society or even the public at large.

All institutions, whether public or civil, should be transparent and accountable, and the NGO’s have repeatedly called for scrutiny and accountability and have advocated the adoption of contemporary standards and laws to regulate the work of all institutions.

Should the Executive have any evidence concerning any specific organizations, then it should make this available to the concerned parties and to the judiciary, and the full force of the law should be applied. The NGO’s have repeatedly invited the Minister of Justice to present his case in specific terms and not to resort to generalizations and across-the-board unsubstantiated accusations.

If these attacks actually prove to be in response to the NGO’s reports on mismanagement and lack of accountability in the PNA or of persistent human rights violations, then the obvious response is the fallacy of the logic of justifying one error by another.

No one is above the law or beyond the accountability.

The divisive impact of such a confrontation is serious indeed. In its inability to meet external challenges and problems, the PNA is turning inwards and conducting a campaign with self-destructive consequences.

Rather than carrying out the necessary reforms within its ranks and forging a solid and unified domestic front to meet the difficult challenges facing the peace process and the nation-building process, the PNA saw fit to misdirect its focus and fabricate “enemies” within.

More significantly, this battle exposes a serious deficiency within the prevailing political culture.

Motivated by a sense of proprietorship, a competition for power, and a vying for funding and resources, the PNA is exhibiting a lack of understanding of the role of civil society and its institutions.

The days of a centralized political power system, upheld by a strong security or police force, are over in terms of contemporary global realities.

It is time to acknowledge that participatory democracy and inclusive governance are the essential requirements for the building of the modern and future Palestinian State.

As such, Palestine is in need of an effective and active partnership among the public sector, the private sector, and civil society to share the responsibility for genuine and comprehensive sustainable development.

No one has accused the PNA of being foreign agents for receiving foreign funding, and the NGO’s have actually succeeded in attracting increased and more diverse funding from additional sources. They are not “taking away” funding slated for the Authority.

While developed countries are allocating funds for their NGO’s and CSO’s (Civil Society Organizations) from their own state budget to enhance empowerment and effective partnership, the PNA is adopting the regressive model of centralized systems of government with full control over all aspects of the life and work of its citizens.

It is also ironic that the very fabric of Palestinian society and most of the services, democratic debates, and information campaigns that sustained Palestinian life under decades of Israeli occupation were the responsibility of NGO’s and CSO’s. Historically, they formed a basis for resistance and the backbone of endurance and steadfastness. The PLO had encouraged, and even supported, the work of many of these institutions. One of the major tasks of the Intifada was the creation of appropriate authentic Palestinian institutions to counter the imposed Israeli occupation policies and measures.

Contrary to the opinion of many officials, the establishment of the PNA does not negate the role of these institutions. Rather, the PNA is in great need of the expertise and experience of such organizations that can share in the difficult responsibilities and burdens of state building and governance.

They also form the guarantee for the application of a democratic system that ensures pluralism and the rule of law within a self-corrective internal partnership.

Any specific violations or excesses, in whatever sector, can be addressed individually and with due process. Should any of these components of Palestinian reality be undermined or destroyed, then all would suffer.

Neither defensiveness nor maneuvering for power terrains should prevail. Complementarity and reinforcement should govern the terms of this essential constructive engagement as an invigorating force for an active and inclusive democracy. Palestine must enter the 21st century and the third millennium empowered by all its citizens, picking up contemporary models of governance, rather than insisting on repeating the mistakes in the history of other nations.