Dissertation access to information & participatory development

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT No. 6 OF 2005 IN
PROMOTING PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT IN UGANDA

BY:

Ogillo Mark Pascal

Reg No. 09/K/29264/EVE
Student No. 209022257

A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF LAW, MAKERERE UNVERSITY, IN PARTIAL
FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF A DEGREE OF BACHELORS OF LAWS
(LLB)

(MAKERERE UNIVERSITY)
June, 2011

"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm
themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the
means of acquiring it; is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy or perhaps both."
-US President James Madison

© 2011

ABSTRACT

Development is a complex multi-dimensional concept based on the expansion of capabilities leading
to enrichment of humans lives through producing ‘life sustaining’ necessities and enhancing social
choice. However, the foregoing is only possible if the people have the freedom and capacity to
choose how they want to live. This choice is exercised through participation in development, a
process through which stakeholders influence and share control over development initiatives and
resources that affect them. This ability to choose subsumes that the citizens are capacitated through
information so as to make informed choices and subsequently qualitatively participate in the process
of development.

However, despite the centrality of the phenomena of development in the structure of governments;
the inability of citizens to participate not only in the process of development, but also in sharing the
benefits of such development are rampant and exhibited through inter alia, the low life
expectancies; high levels of ignorance; and crippling poverty levels. In Uganda, the poverty is
appalling. Uganda ranks 157th out of 182 countries in the 2009 Human Development Index.
Whereas access to information helps promote participatory development, the ranking of Uganda in
access to information and transparency is very low at 51 in the Open Budget Index with key
documents and reports about in-year spending remaining inaccessible, making it extremely difficult
for the public to track what the government is receiving, spending and borrowing throughout each
year. In addition, there is yet to be realized a one-stop portal for the four basic models of e-
governance, namely, Government to Customer (Citizen), Government to Employees, Government to
Government and Government to Business.

The current regime of laws and institutions established by the Uganda government including the
Access to Information Act of 2005, are not sufficient to facilitate participatory development. The
law neither obligates the government to proactively disclose information, nor does it provide for
citizen activism in accessing such information. There is hence need for a comparative review of the
current access to information legislative framework in Uganda, with the aim of understanding the
gaps and lacuna that creates this inertia and to promulgate a new legal regime that will go beyond
merely giving the citizen the right to access public information, but obligating both the government
and private sector players to provide, proactively, certain types of information, which are necessary
for the public to participate not only in governance, but also in to allow them to enhance social
choice in the production of ‘life sustaining’ necessities such as food, shelter, and health care and
eradicating ignorance.

This paper analyzes the relationship between the concept of participatory development and access
to information with special reference to the role of access to information law in facilitating the
popular and hitherto missing participation of the citizenry in development. The author opines that
there is a gap in participation, and the recommends that the government has an obligation to
provide the legal framework for popular participation in development.

ii

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................................ii
CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................iii
DECLARATION.................................................................................................................................v
SUPERVISOR’S APPROVAL...........................................................................................................v
DEDICATION....................................................................................................................................vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................................................vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................................................................viii
-Chapter One- INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................1
1.0 Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Introduction & Contextual Background ..................................................................................1
1.3 Statement Of The Problem.........................................................................................................3
1.4 Purpose Of The Study ...............................................................................................................4
1.5 Research Questions....................................................................................................................4
1.6 Significance Of The Study.........................................................................................................4
1.7 The Research Methodology.......................................................................................................5
1.8 Review Of Literature.................................................................................................................6
1.9 Chapter Breakdown ...............................................................................................................10
-Chapter Two- PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT.....................................................................11
2.0 Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................................11
2.1 Participatory Development .....................................................................................................11
2.2 Development as Participation..................................................................................................13
2.3 Defining Participatory Development ......................................................................................14
2.4 Participatory development in Uganda......................................................................................18
2.5 Challenges and Lessons for participatory development .........................................................20
2.6 Case studies..............................................................................................................................20
2.7 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................22
-Chapter Three- PROMOTING PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AS A HUMAN RIGHT ..23
3.0 Summary ................................................................................................................................23
3.1 Participatory Development As Human Right..........................................................................23
3.2 Development as a Human Right..............................................................................................25
3.3 Criticisms of The Concept of Development as A Human Right ............................................30
3.4 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................30
-Chapter Four- UGANDA’S LEGAL & POLICY FRAMEWORK ON PARTICIPATORY
DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................................................31
4.0 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................................31
4.1 The Province Of Law...............................................................................................................31
4.2 The Constitutional Framework For Popular Participation In Uganda.....................................31
4.3 The Statutory Framework For Popular Participation In Uganda.............................................32
4.4 Uganda’s Policy and Institutional Framework .......................................................................32
4.5 An Analysis Of Laws Encumbering Access To Information .................................................34
-Chapter Five- AN ANALYSIS OF UGANDA’S ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT NO. 6 OF
2005....................................................................................................................................................37
5.0 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................................37
5.1 Principles Of Participatory Development ..............................................................................37
5.2 About Freedom Of Information In Uganda.............................................................................37
5.3 Access To Information Act & Principles Of Participatory Development ..............................38
5.4 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................42
-Chapter Six- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS!....43
6.0 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................................43
6.1 Summary Of Findings ............................................................................................................43
iii

6.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................44
6.3 Conclusion...............................................................................................................................46
6.4 Implication for Future Research .............................................................................................47
BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................................................................48

iv

DECLARATION

I, Ogillo Mark Pascal, hereby declare that this dissertation is my original work, and other works
cited or used are clearly acknowledged. This work has never been submitted to any University,
College or other institution of learning for any academic or other award. Other works cited or
referred to are accordingly acknowledged.

Signed: ……………………………………………………………..

Date: ………………………………………………………………..

SUPERVISOR’S APPROVAL

This dissertation has been submitted for examination with my approval as University supervisor.

Signed:………………………………………………………………

Prof. Frederick Jjuuko,
Makerere University

Date:…………………………………………………………………..

v

DEDICATION

This academic paper is dedicated to that woman called my mother; Fibi, Nyadiedo, the woman from
Adiedo.

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This LLB has been a long walk. As I look back now, I am humbled by my own perseverance and the
support of my friends, family, clients & colleagues.

I salute my father, Ojijo Paul and mother, Fibi Odira, for paying for my education, and for never
doubting my choices. You motivated me to be more every day. Many thanks also to my friends
Booker, Jimmy, Wachira, Wanjohi, Hellen, Asli, Brenda, Rashida, Kamau, Prossy, Salim and Seko, for
their support during my period in exile as a refugee in Uganda. Your sacrifice and support is
deeply appreciated and I owe you my best self. And when I was almost quitting, there was Ms.
Joan, the registrar at the school of law, who took on the role of mother and mentor, to encourage
me to finish the course. Thank you!

This study was carried out under the supervision of Prof. Frederick Jjuuko, of the School of Law at
Makerere University. I wish to thank him most sincerely for his diligent and valuable comments; and
hi encouragement of open dialogue.

Finally, I want to thank the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, which paid for part my tuition and
gave me protection as a refugee in Uganda.

vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
ACSRT African Centre for the Study and Research on Terrorism
AU African Union
GA General Assembly (United Nations)
HRW Human Rights Watch
ICJ International Commission of Jurists
IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development
LRA Lord’s Resistance Army
OAU Organisation of African Unity
PSC Peace and Security Council
PD Participatory Development
SC Security Council (United Nations)
UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights
UHRC Uganda Human Rights Commission
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
UN United Nations
US United States of America
WHO World Health Organization

viii

-Chapter One- INTRODUCTION

1.0 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter serves as the introduction, and provides the general background and framework for the
study. It covers the introduction of the study, statement of the problem, purpose and objective of the
study, research questions, justification and scope of study, literature review and methodology.

1.2 INTRODUCTION & CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND

Development is a complex multi-dimensional concept based on the expansion of capabilities leading
to enrichment of humans lives through producing ‘life sustaining’ necessities and enhancing social
choice (Dudley Seers, 1971).1 However, the expansion of capabilities; production of necessities; and
the enhancement of social choice are only possible if the people have the freedom and capacity to
choose how they want to live (Amartya Sen, 1999).2 This choice is exercised through participation in
development. Participation in development, also referred to as participatory development, involves
both taking part in deciding what development projects to be implemented, and sharing the benefits
accruing from the development project (Tandon and Cordeiro, 1998). Through participatory
development, the citizens can influence and share control over development initiatives, and over the
decisions and resources that affect their lives3. For effective participation, the citizens must be
capacitated through information so as to make informed choices. 4 In Development as Freedom, Sen
argued that individuals act in their best interest whenever they have the choice, that is, when they
possess adequate knowledge.5 Indeed, for truly participatory development to take place anywhere
in a modern nation state, the people must have access to information. Information ensures public
awareness from which people can make informed choices, such as assessment of political and
economic regimes. Confucius warned long ago that, "The people may be made to follow the course of
action; but they may not be made to understand it." Access to information makes people understand
the course of action.

However, despite the centrality of the phenomena of development in the structure of governments;
the inability of citizens to participate not only in the process of development, but also in sharing the
benefits of such development are rampant and exhibited through inter alia, the low life
expectancies; high levels of ignorance; and crippling poverty levels. This is not lessened by the fact
that over 30 countries now have laws that require the disclosure of government records either in
separate legislations in toto or as operative parts of their National Constitutions and various sectoral
legislations and dozen more countries are considering passing access to information legislations.6

Uganda’s Access to Information Act of 20057 has done little to promote participation of the citizens
in the planning, implementation and sharing of resources. The law neither obligates the government
to proactively disclose information, nor does it provide for citizen activism in accessing such
1
Dudley Seers. (1971) Development in a Devided World” Oxford Univeristy Press
2
Amartya Sen Development as Freedom Oxford University Press 1999
3
Framework for Mainstreaming Participatory Development Processes into Bank Operations, ADB. 1996
4
Pillar 2, AHHRIS Convention, Public Participation
5
A. Sen, Development as Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).
6
David Banisar. Freedom of Information and Access to Government Records Around the World, Privacy International, March 2001
available http://pravovedet.ecn.cz/html/zahrleg/FOI_survey3.01.pdf accessed on July 20, 2009
7
The Uganda Gazette No. 42 Volume XCVIII dated 19th July, 2005

information. Indeed, the refusal of the government of Uganda to disclose the details of the
companies mining oil8 and the subsequent harassment of the individuals who sought such information
renders credence to the averment that the law is spineless in promoting participatory development.
Uganda’s poverty is appalling. Uganda ranks 157th out of 182 countries in the 2009 Human
Development Index of the United Nations Development Program9. The ranking of Uganda in access
to information and transparency is very low at 51 in the Open Budget Index with key documents
and reports about in-year spending remaining inaccessible, making it extremely difficult for the
public to track what the government is receiving, spending and borrowing throughout each year.10
Further, corruption, which is central to crippling development, 11is rampant in Uganda, with the
country having been ranked at number 91 by Transparency International in 2010. Transparency
International’s (TI) 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), released in October 2010 identified
Africa as the most corrupt region in the world.12. Global Integrity’s 2006 report on the country
estimates that more than half the government’s annual budget is lost to corruption each year,
amounting to USD 950 million. 13 In addition, the government has held several meetings and
programs to enhance e-governance. These include the Uganda E-Government Strategy (March
2004) Uganda e-Readiness Assessment (March 2004), The National ICT Policy for Uganda
Implementation Framework Draft Final Report (February 2005) and East African Community
Regional E-Government Framework (Draft) December 2005. However, there is yet to be realized a
one-stop portal for the four basic models14 of e-governance, namely, Government to Customer
(Citizen), Government to Employees, Government to Government and Government to Business. The
above leads to the conclusion that the current regimes of laws and institutions established by the
various governments of the world have not promoted participation in development. In Uganda, the
current regime of laws and institutions established by the government of Uganda, are not sufficient
to facilitate participatory development; that is, the participation of the citizenry in development.

Given the foregoing, and appreciating the centrality of participation in development by the citizens,
it is imperative that the law takes a central role in obligating the government to provide information
and facilitate participation in development. Various legal jurisprudes have theorized on the source
of government’s obligation. John Locke (1664) observed that the purpose of law is to preserve and
enlarge freedom.15 The role of law, as stipulated in the contracterian theory of law, is to regulate
relations of the societal towards promoting progress and protection of property and life (Hobbes,
1668; Rousseau, 1762; Locke, 1764). In so doing, the law operates to clearly identify rights and
obligations and to render the correct desert to the various actions (Weber, Max, 1890). This need
for availing information as a tool to enhance participatory governance creates an obligation on the
parties holding the relevant information to ensure that the people attain certain information for their
use in development. This right to access information has been enshrined in treaties, declarations, and
soft law. Indeed, the United Nations, at its founding, recognised the freedom of information as a
fundamental human right (Art. 19, UDHR; Art 19, ICESCR)16 and reflected in the regional human

8
See http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1137943&page=7 accessed on March 15, 2011
9
See Uganda: Country Brief available at http://web.worldbank.org, accessed on March 15, 2011
10
See TRANSPARENCY SNAPSHOT: Uganda
Available at http://www.revenuewatch.org/our-work/countries/uganda/transparency-snapshot accessed on March 16, 2011
11
Id
12
Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index, Transparency International, www.transparency.org.
13
Available at http://www.globalintegrity.org/reports/2006/uganda/index.cfm accessed on March 17, 2011
14
Garson, D.G. (2006). Public Information Technology and E-Governance. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
15
John Locke, (1664) Questions Concerning the Law of Nature, edited. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990.
16
Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (UDHR); Article 19 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966
entry into force 3 January 1976.
2

rights instruments (Art. 10, ECHR; Art. 13, ACHR; Art 13, ACHPR) 17. Indeed, the UN has declared
access to information to be “…the touchstone of all freedoms.”18

There is hence need for a comparative review of the current legislative, policy and institutional
framework in Uganda, with the aim of understanding the gaps and lacuna that creates this inertia
and to promulgate a new legal regime that will go beyond merely giving the citizen the right to
access public information, but obligating both the government and private sector players to provide,
proactively, certain types of information, which are necessary for the public to participate not only
in governance, but also in to allow them to enhance social choice in the production of ‘life sustaining’
necessities such as food, shelter, and health care and broadening their distribution; raising standards
of living; and eradicating ignorance.19 This new regime of laws will move from enhancing access to
information to promoting popular participation through improving the freedom of people to choose20
between different ways of thinking21 and their capability to choose how they want to live.22 This new
regime of laws will be pillared on two twin concepts popular participation of the citizenry in
development through access to information.

This paper analyzes the relationship between the concept of participatory development and access
to information with special the role of access to information law in facilitating the popular and
hitherto missing participation of the citizenry in development. The author hypothesizes that
facilitation of popular participation of the citizenry in the process of development and the sharing of
benefits arising therefrom will lead to enrichment of human lives. The author opines that the current
laws, policies and institutions regulating access to information and availability of communication
infrastructure are not sufficient to facilitate participatory development. There is a gap in
participation, and the role of law in development by regulating social conduct should be invoked.
The governments must now be obliged to establish institutions to promote participation of the
populace in development. The paper concludes that the government has an obligation to provide
legal, institutional and policy infrastructure to ensure that the people attain certain information and
have access to communication avenues for their participation in development.

1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Despite the centrality of the phenomena of development in the enhancement of human lives, the
ability of citizens to participate not only in the process of development, but also in sharing the
benefits of such development are rampant and exhibited through the low life expectancies due to,
inter alia, poor medicare; high levels of ignorance; and crippling poverty levels. This is not lessened
by the fact that Uganda has an access to information law.

It hence seems that the current legal regime is not sufficient to promote access to information for the
purpose of participation of the citizenry in development. It is the opinion of the author that there is
need for a new regime of legal principles that will go beyond giving the citizen the right to access
certain public information based on access to information laws, to obligating the government to
proactively make accessible certain types of information which are important and necessary to
17
; Article 10 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, E.T.S. No. 5 (Rome, November 4,
1950; entered into force September 3, 1953) (ECHR); Article 13 ACHPR; and Article 13 American Convention on Human Rights
(ACHR).
18
Resolution 59(1) of the UN General Assembly Adopted in its First Session in 14th December 1946
19
Tadaro Michael, Economics for a Developing World, Singapore, Longman Group, 2nd Edition Ed 1977.
20
Supra Note 2 above
21
Amartya Sen (1981) Equality of What
22
Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation (1981)
3

allow the public to enhance social choice in the production of ‘life sustaining’ necessities such as food,
shelter, and health care and broadening their distribution; raising standards of living; and
eradicating ignorance.23

1.4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The main purpose of this research paper is to analyze the effectiveness of Uganda’s access to
information act of 2005 in promoting participatory development.

1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The primary research question this study seeks to address is whether it is possible to effectively
promote participatory development under the current access to information regime in Uganda.
Other questions which shall be addressed are as follows:

1. What is participatory development?
2. What is the role of law in enhancing participatory development?
3. What are the challenges facing participation of citizenry in development?
4. To what extent does the access to information law of 2005 promote participatory
development?
5. What changes should be made to the access to information act of 2005 to enhance
participatory development?

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The priority and seriousness of participation of the citizenry in development cannot be gainsaid.
Further, the role of information in enhancing the quality of participation is as paramount.
Unfortunately, there has not a comparative analysis of the extent to which Uganda’s Access to
Information Act no. 6 of 2009, promotes participatory development. This study seeks to fill this gap.

This study is also significant because Uganda, like most African countries, is facing still challenges in
participation of the citizenry in development, and this can be attributed to the inability of the legal
regime to promote effective participation. It is, therefore, imperative to interrogate the current legal
regime regulating access to information and communication infrastructures and their effectiveness in
promoting participatory development. Out of this analysis, the paper shall identify gaps and lacuna
that need be filled, either through legislative amendments and enactments; policy formulation and
implementation; and institutional reorganization and strengthening to advance the ideal of
participatory development.

Further, the study seeks to relate this study to the larger, ongoing dialogue in the literature about
information for development and the role of law; seeking to fill in the gaps and proposing new
perspectives for the information for development discipline. The results of this study will hence
provide useful academic knowledge and resource to students, academicians, policy makers and
other stakeholders who wish to understand in depth the area of study. Consequently, it will offer a

23
4

basis for further criticisms and development of the knowledge on the need for information for
development and the role of law in the same.

Further, the paper will introduce a paradigmatic shift to the current debate on access to information
by placing responsibility on the government to not only make accessible, but to publish and
popularize certain types of information which are important for the citizens to participate in
development.

1.7 THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1.7.1 Data Type

The research shall utilize secondary data only. The researcher shall not carry out primary data
collection, partly due to the availability of the required data, and partly due to the limitation of
time and money to carry out primary data collection and data analysis.

1.7.2 Data Sources

The data to be collected shall be obtained through desk -top research, library research, internet
research, legislative analyses and comparative analyses of various jurisdictions on access to
information and participation.

1.7.3 Data Analysis

The data will be analysed through a comparative study of the research materials so as to seek to
show the importance of access to information for the enhancement of participation in development
process and the role of law in enhancing the access to information.

1.7.4 Data Presentation

The research final work shall be presented in the form of a dissertation paper.

1.7.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study

The study shall be confined to the role of law in enhancing access to information; and the nexus
between participatory development and access to information.

The theoretical scope of the study will involve the analysis of the theories of participatory approach
in development and access to information as human rights concepts.

This author shall critically analyse the extent to which laws in Uganda, including ratified international
legal instruments; the 1995 constitution; case law; and legislations, principles of law derived from
case law; jurisprudence and soft law in international legal regime; institutions, both public and
private; and policies, draft and actualized, in Uganda affect, either through claw-back provisions,
or progressively, the strategies, policies and principles of development communication namely,
facilitating participation; making information understandable and meaningful; and fostering policy
acceptance-the areas of questionnaire and analysis benchmarks.
5

The paper is however not an exhaustive survey of the topics presented but provides a critical
analysis to how the current legal, policy and institutional frameworks affect the access to information
and communication infrastructure which are necessary for participation of citizens in development.

A further limitation in the study is the fact that the author shall only use secondary data. This is
mainly because the author seeks to do a critical analysis of theories already espoused by various
writers and hence the work is not a novel theoretical masterpiece but an attempt to seek the best
relationship between various theories for the purposes of effective and maximum output.

1.8 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1.8.1 Summary

This literature review aims to review the critical points of current knowledge and or methodological
approaches on the relationship between access to information, the law and participatory
development. The literature reviews are secondary sources, and as such, do not report any new or
original experimental work. The goal of this literature review is to bring the reader up to date with
current literature on the definition of participatory development, the role of access to information in
enhancing participatory development, and the role of the law in promoting access to information,
for the purpose of promoting participatory development. Further, the review will establish the gap,
which necessitates this research study

1.8.2 Introduction

Literature in information for development is fairly recent. This literature review seeks to share with
the reader the results of other studies and writings on the role of law in enhancing access to
information for the purposes of participatory development, noting that Information for development
(Infodev) is rapidly becoming recognised an interdisciplinary research field.24

1.8.3 Participatory development

Participation

Long (1999) defines participation as a process through which stakeholders influence and share
control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them.

Tandon and Cordeiro (1998), building on World Bank (1994), state that participation is an
interactive process involving the continuous re-adjustment of relationships between different
stakeholders in a society in order to increase stakeholder control and influence over initiatives that
affect their lives.

Gaventa (1998) posits that there are various levels and/or degrees of participation ranging from
simple consultation to joint decision making to self-management by stakeholders themselves. The
24
McNamara, Kerry S. (2003). "Inforamtion and Communication Technologies, Poverty and Development: Learning From the
Experience" (PDF). World Bank, Washington D.C., USA. Retrieved on 2007-04-08.
6

specific degree of participation of different stakeholders is determined through a negotiation
process, but the challenge is to increase numbers without undermining quality-involving people
throughout the development process in a way that empowers.

Development

Samuel Huntington (1963) determined development to be a linear process which every country must
go through. In propounding the modernity theory in development, he stated that the state is a
central actor in modernizing "backward" or "underdeveloped" societies. He hence put the state at
the centre of development. This has since been refuted, however, with the new theories of bottom up
development, which put the stakeholders, and especially the citizens, at the centre of development.
Participatory development puts the people at the centre of development.

On the other hand, Professor Michael Todaro (1977) sees three objectives of development as
producing more ‘life sustaining’ necessities such as food, shelter, and health care and broadening
their distribution; raising standards of living and individual self esteem; and expanding economic
and social choice and reducing fear. This statement puts participation of the citizenry at the centre
of development.25

Amartya Sen (1981) in his seminal work, Development as Freedom, States that development is the
expansion of capabilities leading to enrichment of human lives. This, he argues, is only possible if the
people have the freedom to choose between different ways of thinking, the (cap) ability to choose
how they want to live. For the choice to be meaningful; it has to be informed, hence the need for
information to build on the quality of participation.

A critique of Sen’s views exposes a human rights concept in the freedom angle. The freedoms and
entitlements of the citizenry in choosing the lifestyles they want and hence enriching their lives is
buttressed by the conception of development as a human right, which has dignity as a central theme
in the realization of the full potential of man; and is hence central to the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.26

The freedoms and entitlements of the populace in the process of development are captured clearly
in the 1986 Seoul Declaration on the Right to Development,27 which stated unequivocally that the
right to development is a human right; and the Second UN World Conference on Human Rights in
Vienna, 1993. It is also important to note that the concept of human development as a human right is
supported by “social contract” philosophical pronouncements of natural rights theorists, Hobbes
(1588-1679); Locke (1632-1704) and Rousseau (1712-1778), but were best exemplified by
Locke’s claim during the English Revolution of 1688 that ‘…certain rights like the right to life, liberty,
and property belonged to individuals as human beings because they existed in the state of nature
before human beings entered civil society.’

Professor Dudley Seers (1971) 28 argues that development is about outcomes, that is, development
occurs with the reduction and elimination of poverty, inequality, and unemployment within a growing

25
26
Article 1 of the UDHR
27
The Declaration on the Right to Development was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, resolution 4/128 on
December 4, 1986 (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/74.htm). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by UN
General Assembly Resolution 217 (A) II on December 10, 1948.
28
Dudley Seers, (1971) Development in a Devided World” Oxford Univeristy Press
7

economy. As per the doctrine of participation, development is both a process and a result, hence
outcome.

Ekins (1986) argued for development from below, as the philosophy and action of learning from
below. Development from below seeks to consult first with “those who are last” in determining the
development agenda. The spinal cord of development from below is participation of the people in
formulating the plans, implementing them and participating in the sharing of benefits resulting from
such developmental processes. This view is very representative of the principle of participatory
development.

Participation in Development

Long (1999) defines participation in development as adopting the institutional reforms and
innovations necessary to enable full and systematic incorporation of participatory methodologies so
that meaningful primary stakeholder participation becomes a regular part of a project and policy
development, implementation and evaluation. Accordingly hence, the concept of participation is
concerned with ensuring that the intended beneficiaries of development projects and programmes
are themselves involved in the planning and execution of those projects and programmes. This
empowers the recipients of development projects to influence and manage their own development -
thereby removing any culture of dependency.

1.8.4 Access to Information for Participatory Development

The issue of ensuring access to information as a pre-condition to achieve sustainable development
has been addressed by several meetings and international conferences, including but not limited to
the World Summit on the Information Society, 2005 World Summit, and World Social Forum
(1998).29

Daniel Lerner (1958) believed that that mass media could facilitate change from a traditional
society to a modern consumer democracy by enhancing participation of the masses in
development.30

Talcott Parsons (1968) functional sociology lends credence to Lehre’s theory, by stating the qualities
that distinguished "modern" and "traditional" societies and putting education in the centre. Education,
according to Parsons, is key to creating modern individuals. Technology played a key role in this
theory because it was believed that as technology was developed and introduced to lesser
developed countries it would spur growth.

Wilbur Schramm (1980), in addressing the importance of information in development, set targets for
developing nations to meet: newspapers, radio sets, cinema seats and TV sets per 1,000
populations. This top-down approach is widely criticized on the grounds that each nation should set
its own goals. It also focuses on national media and gives little attention to local or community
media.

29
Convention On Access To Information, Public Participation In Decision-Making And Access To Justice In Environmental Matters done
at Aarhus, Denmark, on 25 June 1998.
30
Daniel Lehrer, The Passing of Traditional Societies (1958)
8

Everett Rogers (1976) on the other hand looked more closely at specific development projects and
the adoption of new technology and ideas among target populations. He called this the diffusion of
innovations. Modern projects tend to continue this emphasis on specific goals in fields such as
agricultural extension and health education. 31

An expansion of the concept of Information for Development (Infodev) can be found in the work of
Paulo Freire (1984) who stresses dialogue with communities about their actual needs rather than
one-way communication by education as the most productive means of development. 32

However, the idea of Information for Development (Infodev) has been criticized by Luis Ramiro
Beltan (1980) and Alfonso Gumucio Dagron (2001) 33 as tending to locate the problem in the
underdeveloped nation rather than its unequal relations with powerful economies. There is also an
assumption that Western models of industrial capitalism are appropriate for all parts of the world.
Many projects for Information for Development (Infodev) fail to address the real underlying
problems in poor countries such as lack of access to land, agricultural credits and fair market prices
for products. Such problems cannot be solved by education or communication alone but requires
fundamental social change. The author thinks differently, since the acquisition of knowledge leads to
faster social change than ignorance. 34

1.8.5 Participation & Access to Information: The Role of Law

Law as a Guarantor of Human Freedoms

John Locke (1664) observed that the purpose of law is to preserve and enlarge freedom. 35 Indeed,
the role of law, as stipulated in the contracterian theory of law, is to regulate relations of the
societal towards promoting progress and protection of property and life (Hobbes; Rousseau; Locke).
In so doing, the law operates to clearly identify rights and obligations and to render the correct
desert to the various actions (Weber, Max).

There is hence need for availing information creates an obligation on the parties holding the
relevant information to ensure that the people attain certain information for their use in
development.

Access to Information as a Right

Access information has been enshrined in treaties, declarations, and soft law as a human right.
Indeed, the United Nations, at its founding, recognised the freedom of information as a fundamental
human right (Art. 19, UDHR; Art 19, ICESCR)36 and reflected in the regional human rights instruments
(Art. 10, ECHR; Art. 13, ACHR; Art 13. ACHPR) 37. Indeed, the UN has declared access to information

31
Everett Rogers, "Communication and Development: The Passing of A Dominant Paradigm," Communication Research 3, 2, (1976):
213-40.
32
Paulo Frerre, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 1984
33
Alfonso Gumucio Dagron, Making Waves: Stories of Participatory Communication for Social Change, 2001, the Rockefeller
Foundation.
34
Luis Ramiro Beltran, "A Farewell to Aristotle: Horizontal Communication," Communication 5 (1980), 5-41
35
John Locke, (1664) Questions Concerning the Law of Nature, edited. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990.
36
Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (UDHR); Article 19 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966
entry into force 3 January 1976.
9

to be “…the touchstone of all freedoms.”38 The above means that the government is obliged, as duty
bearers, to fulfill, protect and promote access to information as a human right, to the right holders,
being the citizenry.

ICJ (K) (2009) reported that the citizenry must be informed for the realization of a just, free and
equitable society where the rule of law is observed, human rights protected and democracy
enhanced.39 The author agrees totally that for the participation of the citizens to be meaningful, they
need to be informed, so that they engage in informed participation.

From the foregoing, the freedom of information is widely recognised as an important component of
human rights which is capable of fulfilling important roles in society and as an underpinning of
democracy.

1.8.6 Conclusion: The Gap-The Situation in Uganda

The constitution of Uganda in article 41 provides for the access to information by citizens. This is also
provided for by the access to information act of 2005. 40 Uganda has also established various
offices, both by acts of parliament and administrative offices, which seek to enhance the access to
information by the citizenry, including the office of the ombudsman. There is also established the
commission for access to information, and the office of the ombudsman, for the purposes of lodging
complaints, not to mention the law courts. However, access to information for the purposes of
development has not been effected.

However, all the regimes of laws, policies and institutions, and judicial pronouncements, there lacks a
clear guideline that allows the citizens to participate in development initiatives or that obligates the
government to give certain types of information to the societal for their use in making life choices
and enhancing the quality of their lives. This paper looks at the gaps and offers recommendations.

1.9 CHAPTER BREAKDOWN

This study is undertaken in five chapters. Each chapter will aim at answering one or more of the
research questions. Chapter one serves as the introduction, and provides the general background
and framework for the study. Chapter two is an incisive analysis of the concepts of participatory
development generally, but with specific reference to Uganda. Chapter three is dedicated to an in-
depth examination of the international and regional standards and human rights framework for
promoting participatory development. Chapter four focuses on Uganda’s legal and policy
framework on participatory development. Chapter five focuses on Uganda’s Access to Information
Act No. 6 of 2005 with reference to its ability to promote participatory development in Uganda.
Chapter six is the summary of findings, conclusion and recommendations of the study.

37
; Article 10 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, E.T.S. No. 5 (Rome, November 4,
1950; entered into force September 3, 1953) (ECHR); Article 13 ACHPR; and Article 13 American Convention on Human Rights
(ACHR).
38
Resolution 59(1) of the UN General Assembly Adopted in its First Session in 14th December 1946
39
ICJ (k) Publication, Freedom of Access to Information in Kenya: Analysis of Access to Information Act
40
Cap 534 laws of Uganda
10

-Chapter Two- PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

2.0 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter is an incisive analysis of the concept of participatory development generally, but with
specific reference to its application in Uganda.

2.1 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

2.1.1 Defining Participation

Participation is a process through which stakeholders influence and exercise control over
development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them (World Bank 1996). It is
an interactive process involving the continuous re-adjustment of relationships between different
affect their lives (Tandon and Cordeiro 1998). The United Nations Research Institute for Social
Development (UNRISD)'s Popular Participation Program, (1996) defined participation as "the
organized effort to increase control over resources and regulative institutions in given social
situations on the part of groups or movements hitherto excluded from such control".41 Although rather
general, this definition captures the wider meaning of the participation concept and stresses its
empowerment, control and decision-making aspects. The World Bank's Learning Group on Popular
Participation defined popular participation as "a process by which people, especially
disadvantaged people, influence decisions that affect them".42 Citizen participation is the 'direct
ways in which citizens influence and exercise control in governance’ (Gaventa and Valderrama 1999).

2.1.2 Levels and Dimensions of Participation

There are various levels and/or degrees of participation ranging from simple consultation to joint
decision making to self-management by stakeholders themselves. The specific degree of
participation of different stakeholders is determined through a negotiation process, but the
challenge is to increase numbers without undermining quality-involving people throughout the
development process in a way that empowers (Gaventa 1998).

2.1.3 Why Participation?

There are various benefits of participation, as herein below listed.
a) Tying Programs to People

Citizen participation is a desired and necessary part of community development activities. As
Spiegel notes, "Citizen Participation is the process that can meaningfully tie programs to people"
(1968). Citizen participation in community decision-making can be traced as far back as Plato's
Republic. Plato's concepts of freedom of speech, assembly, voting, and equal representation have
evolved through the years to form basic pillars upon which the United States was established. Citizen

41
UNRISD (1996). Their choice or yours: Global forces or Local voices? Discussion Paper No.79.
42
World Bank (1995), World Bank Participation Sourcebook, Environment Department Papers. Participation Series Washington D.C.
World Bank.
11

participation is the essence of democracy. Heberlein (1976) notes that public involvement results in
better decisions.

b) Check & Balance

Citizen participation in community affairs serves to check and balance political activities.
Participation allows fuller access to benefits of a democratic society (Wade 1989). Partisan political
favors, pork barreling, and nepotism are negative examples of unchecked political behavior. A
cross section of citizen participation in the decision-making process reduces the likelihood of
community leaders making self-serving decisions.

c) Dignity

Cahn and Camper (1968) suggest that merely knowing that one can participate promotes dignity
and self-sufficiency within the individual. It taps the energies and resources of individual citizens
within the community and provides a source of special insight, information, knowledge, and
experience, which contributes to the soundness of community solutions. The result is an emphasis on
problem solving to eliminate deficiencies in the community (Christensen & Robinson 1980).

d) Program Legitimacy

Cook (1975) notes that citizen participation can legitimize a program, its plans, actions, and
leadership. To legitimize can often mean the difference between success and failure of community
efforts. Unsupported leaders often become discouraged and drop activities that are potentially
beneficial to community residents. Voluntary participation can also reduce the cost for personnel
needed to carry out many of the duties associated with community action. Without this support,
scores of worthwhile projects would never be achieved in many communities.

e) Equitable Resource Allocation

Long (1999) defines participation as a process through which stakeholders influence and share
control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them. This leads to
equitable resource allocation, as per the needs of the stakeholders.

f) Encouraging Bottom Up Process
Tandon and Cordeiro (1998), building on World Bank (1994), state that participation is an
interactive process involving the continuous re-adjustment of relationships between different
affect their lives. This presupposes a bottom up process, which is the current trend in developmental
paradigms.

2.1.4 Conditions of Citizen Participation/ Facilitating Citizen Participation

People become involved in community affairs only when certain conditions are present (Wade
1989, Christensen and Robinson 1980). Whereas the conditions to be met are various, the two basic
conditions are the presence of structures and institutions for participation; and the presence of
knowledge to make citizens use the structures.
12

a) Institutional Structure

Citizen participation is chiefly facilitated with an appropriate organizational structure. Sills (1966)
notes that there is the need for organizational structures appropriate for citizen participation. These
must be hinged on the law, and supported by policy.

b) Information (Better Knowledge)

People are reluctant to participate in community activity when they do not have enough information
to act responsibly. If citizens do not know how to act, they will avoid participation as long as
possible or until they have what they believe to be sufficient information.43

2.2 DEVELOPMENT AS PARTICIPATION

As noted earlier, development is a complex multi-dimensional concept based on the expansion of
capabilities leading to enrichment of humans lives through producing ‘life sustaining’ necessities and
enhancing social choice (Dudley Seers, 1971).44 However, the expansion of capabilities; production
of necessities; and the enhancement of social choice are only possible if the people have the
freedom and capacity to choose how they want to live (Amartya Sen, 1999).45

This choice is exercised through participation in development. Participation in development, also
referred to as participatory development, involves both taking part in deciding what development
projects to be implemented, and sharing the benefits accruing from the development project (Tandon
and Cordeiro, 1998). Through participatory development, the citizens can influence and share
control over development initiatives, and over the decisions and resources that affect their lives46.

For effective participation, the citizens must be capacitated through information so as to make
informed choices. 47 In Development as Freedom, Sen argued that individuals act in their best interest
whenever they have the choice, that is, when they possess adequate knowledge.48 Indeed, for truly
participatory development to take place anywhere in a modern nation state, the people must have
access to information. Information ensures public awareness from which people can make informed
choices, such as assessment of political and economic regimes. Confucius warned long ago that, "The
people may be made to follow the course of action; but they may not be made to understand it." Access
to information makes people understand the course of action.

From the foregoing, true development only subsists in an environment of participation; hence,
development is only development properly so called when it is participatory.

43
Id
44
Dudley Seers. (1971) Development in a Devided World” Oxford Univeristy Press
45
Amartya Sen Development as Freedom Oxford University Press 1999
46
Framework for Mainstreaming Participatory Development Processes into Bank Operations, ADB. 1996
47
Pillar 2, AHHRIS Convention, Public Particiaption
48
A. Sen, Development as Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).
13

2.3 DEFINING PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

Participatory development is also referred to as Participation in Development49. Long (1999) defines
participation in development as adopting the institutional reforms and innovations necessary to
enable full and systematic incorporation of participatory methodologies so that meaningful primary
stakeholder participation becomes a regular part of a project and policy development,
implementation and evaluation. Accordingly hence, the concept of participation is concerned with
ensuring that the intended beneficiaries of development projects and programmes are themselves
involved in the planning and execution of those projects and programmes. This empowers the
recipients of development projects to influence and manage their own development - thereby
removing any culture of dependency. There are many different public participation mechanisms,
although these often share common features (for a list over 100 mechanisms, and a typology of
mechanisms, see Rowe and Frewer, 2005).50

2.3.1 The Rise of Participatory Development

Participatory development is not a recent phenomenon. Democratic forms of decision-making have
existed in most cultures including religious communities and political dissident movements.
Participatory principles were central to the international cooperative movement, many nationalist
and some socialist movements (Tandon, 1998). In the 1950s and 1960s postcolonial and post
revolutionary governments employed a wide range of measures at local and community level in
attempts to mobilize their populations for national development.51

In the 1970s and 1980s there was widespread institutionalization of the rhetoric of participatory
development in response to evidence of the failure of large numbers of expensive large-scale, top-
down projects in both capitalist and socialist countries. In the 1980s this emphasis on participatory
development was also part of the move to 'roll back the state' and to put greater emphasis on non-
governmental organizations as providers of services previously supplied by the state
(Sriskandarajah et al, 1991).

By the end of the 1980s participatory development had become an established umbrella term for a
new style of development. There is a plethora of manuals on techniques for participatory
development produced by a wide range of organizations. Most international donor agencies have
official statements about the need for beneficiary participation and project guidelines for
participatory projects (Long, 1999)

2.3.2 Why Participatory Development?

Participatory development has been promoted on the basis of a number of arguments:

a) Rights Argument

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)52, in article 1 recognizes
the right of all peoples to self-determination, including the right to "freely determine their political

49
Id
50
Rowe, G. and Frewer, L.J. (2005) A typology of public engagement mechanisms, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30 (2),
251-290.
51
id
52
Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 16, 1966, and in force from January 3, 1976.
14

status"53, right participate effectively in society (Articles 13 and 14); and right to participation in
cultural life (Article 15)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 54UDHR guarantees the right to participate in cultural life
and to enjoy the benefits of social progress in article 27. Article 21 outlines the right to participate
in government and in free elections.

Participation, and particularly and explicitly participation of the poorest and most vulnerable
participants is a human right and an inherent and indivisible component of pro-poor development
strategies and empowerment. Long (1999) argues that participation in development leads to the
involvement of the primary stakeholders in the development process. Such involvement, the author
posits, enhances ownership, and sustainability of the development programs.

The 'UN System Network on Rural Development and Food Security'55 describes participation as one of
the ends as well as one of the means of development. Participation is hence useful in all the stages of
development program, right from conceptualization, planning, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation.

Article 1 of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and
Access to Justice in Environmental Matters56 states that,

“In order to contribute to the protection of the right of every person of present and future
generations to live in an environment adequate to his or her health and well-being, each Party shall
guarantee the rights of access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to
justice in environmental matters in accordance with the provisions of this Convention.”

Further, Article 3 of the same convention provides that,
“such participation shall lead to mobilization of the community and their transformation into
prefects of their development.“

In Africa, the African countries have made major strides in democratizing governance since the 1990
Arusha Conference, which produced the African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and
Transformation57. The Arusha document was a milestone as it identified the lack of popular
participation in development as central to the dismal state of African economies and cause of
political instability and social calamity. Popular participation is both a means and an end. Popular
participation is recognized in the document as a fundamental right of the people to fully and
effectively participate in the determination of the decisions which affect their lives at all levels and
at all times.

Further, African [Banjul] Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights 58 ACHPR in article 13(1) provides
that every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country, either
directly or through freely chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions of the law.

53
ICESCR, Article 1.2
54
Adopted in 1948
55
Available at www.rdfs.net/ accessed on June 14th 2011
56
Adopted At Aarhus, Denmark, on 25 June 1998
57
adopted in February 1990 at the "International Conference on Popular Participation in the Recovery and Development Process in
Africa", Arusha, Tanzania
58
Adopted June 27, 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), entered into force Oct. 21, 1986
15

A critical analysis of the above international human rights documents exposes 5 (five) core principles
for effective citizens’ participation, namely, mass literacy; democratization; freedom of association,
political accountability of leadership; and decentralization of decision-making processes and
institutions.

b) Effectiveness Argument

Participation of the main stakeholders increases the accuracy of information and relevance to the
realities of peoples' lives and policy decision and implementation processes. Public participation is
viewed as a tool, intended to inform planning, organizing or funding of activities. Public
participation may also be used to measure attainable objectives, evaluate impact, and identify
lessons for future practice.59 The public can also better assess government performance and support
the oversight of decision making if they are aware of the criteria that are to be applied by the
government agencies making the decisions. At a minimum, the public should know60:

i. How the funding priorities were decided;
ii. How they can input;
iii. How plans are made at community level;
iv. How policy consultations are run, who is involved when the policy decisions are made and
what arguments exist for and against various policies;
v. How government activities are monitored and how they can get involved;

c) Cost-Efficiency Argument

Involvement of the main stakeholders increases ownership of the development process, better use of
resources and is likely to enable mobilisation of local resources to augment or even substitute those
from outside. Much of the failure of the strategies of development is due to the fact that most of
them were designed in closed environment. If governments were to be obligated to provide
information, then public can be empowered to more meaningfully determine their own
developmental destines. They can assess the development strategies they want, the project they
need and if they are suppressed, they can press for changes to put the development back on track.

d) Process Argument

The participatory process, through building skills, capacities and networks is a contribution in itself to
pro-poor development, civil society and empowerment. The role of public participation in economic
and human development was enshrined in the 1990 African Charter for Popular Participation in
Development and Transformation. 61 Further, improved access to information and public participation
in decision-making enhance the quality and the implementation of decisions, contribute to public
awareness of environmental issues, give the public the opportunity to express its concerns and
enable public authorities to take due account of such concerns. This further presupposes that the

59
Davies, A. (2001). ‘What silence knows – planning, public participation and environmental values’, Environmental Values, 10: 77–
102.
60
Id
61
Adopted in February 1990 at the "International Conference on Popular Participation in the Recovery and Development Process in
Africa", Arusha, Tanzania, and available at http://apic.igc.org/african-initiatives/chartall.htm accessed on June 11, 2011
16

public is aware of the procedures for participation in decision-making and they have free access to
them and know how to use them.

2.3.3 Criticisms of Participatory Development

Despite the various benefits of participatory development, there are various critiques to the concept
as below:

a) Costly & Slow

When compared with traditional forms of development, Participatory Development (PD) is
sometimes criticized for being costly and slow. A project may take longer if one has to engage,
work and come to a consensus with local communities, than if one did not have to do these things. 62
PD may also have higher start up costs than traditional development.

b) Low Coverage

In addition, PD is criticized for reaching a smaller population than traditional development.
Community dialogue and augmentation may initially involve only a few individuals, whereas
dropped food aid reaches hundreds of people.63

c) Marginalization

Critics also argue that in trying to give voice to communities, development agencies may connect
only with elite members of a group, thereby re-enforcing local inequalities. They hence treat all
people in communities the same, 64 hence not addressing such issues as gender power imbalances
65
and hence it fails to adequately address other inequalities such as class66. PD projects have also
been accused of enabling tokenism, where a few “hand-picked” local voices are allowed to speak as
a “rubber stamp to prove...participatory credentials”.67 This view suggests that organizations only
include local voices to improve their image, without really seeking to engage the population with
which they are working. Further, there are arguments that outsiders may further reinforce existing
inequalities because of their ignorance of local inequalities and/or their dependence on these
power structures to gain access to 'communities'. Reference to 'cultural-sensitivity' and the need for
'community participation' are often cited as reasons for not addressing gender issues without even
consulting women or men about gender concerns they may have.

A response to the above criticisms would be that the institution implementing the PD projects must be
engendered and be well representative.

62
Jennings, R. (2000). ‘Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The Transition of Development Professionalism’. Community
Based Reintegration and Rehabilitation in Post-Conflict Settings Conference. pp 4.
63
Id
64
Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 46.
65
Mayoux, L. (1995) ‘Beyond Naivety: Women, Gender Inequality and Participatory Development.” Institute of Social Studies. pp
242.
66
Mohan, G. (2007) “Participatory Development: From Epistemological Reversals to Active Citizenship”. Geography Compass. pp
784
67
Mohan, G. (2008). ‘Participatory Development’. The Companion to Development Studies. Hodder Education. pp 48
17

2.4 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT IN UGANDA

Uganda as a country has adopted various approaches for participatory development at various
levels. A few are sampled hereinunder.

2.4.1 The Participatory Development (PDM) Programme

The Participatory Development Programme is Government’s deliberate effort to build mutual trust
and therefore willingness of the Local Authorities to respect and respond to decisions taken and
needs identified through citizen’s participatory processes. It is guided by principles of knowledge
and awareness of the Government policies and priorities by the citizenry, self reliance, openness,
inclusiveness, transparency and both upward and downward accountability. The Programme is
designed to strengthen Local Government institutions to deepen decentralization to the grassroots.
Ministry of Local Government and Local Governments implement it with the support of UNDP,
Uganda.

The programme aims at assisting Government to implement the above legal provisions intended to
empower the local population to effectively participate in planning and management of
development programmes which impact on them directly. It also aims at ensuring that peoples’
visions and priorities, right from the village and cell level, are used as building blocks of
development plans of higher-level councils and Governments. Activities under the PDM programme
revolve around supporting local governments to involve civil society in decision making and
development management. This involves capacity enhancement of the Political and Technical
Leadership to support and embrace participatory development management as a working modality
in their Local Governments.

2.4.2 Participatory Budgeting from Uganda Fieldwork

There is a strong legal, political and institutional framework to support participatory budgeting activ
ities in Uganda. The local governments are generally following the process of participatory budgeti
ng as outlined in the General Guide to the LocalBudget Process. One area of concern is the extent t
o which the process is truly inclusive and participatory. But holding them during a busier season migh
t have adversely impacted attendance. For example, a budget conference during the working hour
s might preclude a business person from attending due to his occupational duties whle holding it in th
e evening might preclude a housewife from attending due to her household duties. Additionally, the t
eam established that when participants do attend, they do not always exercise their voice. With mu
ltiple stakeholder groups in the audience, one group can tend to dominate discussion. For example, i
n the study, both community members and local government officials cited technical budgeting knowl
edge as a hindrance to implementing partiipatory budgeting. However, budgeting is complicated a
nd that inadequate understanding of the topic could impact the process bothon the effectiveness of t
he mechanism and the process of participation in its own right. Additionally, it is likely that the lack
of capacity of both technical staff and citizen participants adversely impacts the extent to which arti
cipatory budgeting occurs in Uganda. Such an argument indicates that in some cases local level offi
cials themselves do not understand what participatory processestruly mean, let alone have the capac
ity to facilitate them. In this sense, one can argue that there is no true participation in these forums,
as technical staff neither facilitated conversation nor probed citizens to uncover their true priorities.

18

2.4.3 Mechanism for Strengthening Accountability in Local Governance

Uganda also has periodic elections which have a tendency of disciplining the councillors to make
policies that serve the needs of those who elect them. However, there are other mechanisms that can
be used to hold the local governments accountable. First is the right to recall non-performing
representatives. The Ugandan law is explicit on this. Also, citizens can petition against wrong acts.
This element can be strong if there is a strong civil society. Further, the right to information is a
strong tool for accountability. The Ugandan local government laws provide for the publication of
finances in local newspapers circulating in the area (GoK 1998: 127). Uganda, the Universal
Primary Education fund figures are displayed on school notice boards for citizens to see and take
action if they think there is some foul play. In addition, Ugandan local governments hold budget
conferences that contribute to improving the accountability of representatives. Again, there is the
provision for citizen’s right to information, a window that can be used by individuals and civil society
to monitor what the local government is doing. The Uganda Debt Network, an NGO based in
Kampala is monitoring the use of Universal Primary Education funds. This is helping improve
accountability.

2.4.4 Local Development Planning

One of the important outcomes of participatory development based on the LC system is local
development planning. All districts are now expected to compile respective District Development
Plan (DDP) reflecting the needs of the grassroots people. However, the level of popular
participation in planning varies considerably from one district to another. Citizens’ participation in
Uganda has been skewed towards politics. Adults are allowed, and the majority actually votes their
leaders into office. Also the media is predominantly preoccupied with political debates. Sometimes
such debates influence the decision-making processes of Local Authorities. Citizens’ participation in
decision making on development matters that affect them has generally been passive. This is based
on the real or perceived failure of Governments, Central or Local to deliver expected services to the
citizens. This seems to be the real or apparent reason why local people participate more in politics
than in development planning and implementation. People tend to look for leaders who can deliver
hence the explanation of the high turnover of political leaders. Attempts to solicit peoples’
involvement take the form of occasional one-time consultations, which although sometimes taken to
be a proxy for participatory practice, only enable the local authorities to exercise their right to be
heard. They are supply focused, not inclusive because they are dominated by the elite and are
often marred by mistrust and negative attitudes of both the upstream technocrats and the
communities themselves. They therefore don’t allow for peoples’ demands to influence policy making
in Local Governments. Consequently peoples’ needs are not accurately identified to inform policy
decision-making processes which results into incidences of resentment and occasionally
demonstrations over development decisions taken by local authorities. Often this calls for tireless
and at times costly interventions to solicit peoples’ support of decisions already taken. Occasionally
the decisions are painfully reversed.

19

2.5 CHALLENGES AND LESSONS FOR PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT

The challenges and risks associated with participatory development planning include:

a) Time and Money

The participatory techniques themselves are as such inexpensive to use. However, the overall
planning process can require a considerable staff time and resources on the part of the government
or development agency, especially if it involves extensive preparatory activities like information
campaigns and training of facilitators, and the convening of large multi-stakeholder meetings. For
local stakeholders, their participation can have significant costs in terms of their time and effort,
particularly if they need to forego any wages or sacrifice time spent on subsistence activities.

b) Resistance and Manipulation

Some groups or individuals involved in the participatory planning process may find it difficult to
accept the collaborative decision-making approach. For example the government decision-makers
may feel threatened that their responsibilities and power are being undermined and may become
obstacles to the process (et al. 2004). Other stakeholders may try and manipulate the process to
push their own agendas.

c) Bypassing Existing Planning Structures

If participatory approaches are not carefully integrated into formal planning frameworks, they can
undermine these existing structures thereby risking conflict and a poor receptivity of the outputs of
the participatory planning on the part of public authorities.

d) Scaling–Up Risks

The success of participatory approaches relies on their adaptability to different situations.
Therefore, when governments or development agencies attempt to replicate and standardize the
use of such approaches on a large scale, there is a risk that the participatory element will become
negligible or even meaningless.

2.6 CASE STUDIES

2.6.1 Rural Community and Sub-District-Level Planning In Indonesia

The Indonesian government launched the Kecamatan (Sub-district) Development Program (KDP) in
1998 as a response to a severe economic crisis. The aim of the program which ended in 2008 has
been to alleviate poverty and improve local-level governance by: providing poor communities with
the financial and organizational resources to decide how to improve their livelihoods; build
appropriate infrastructure; provide health care and education services; and build effective local
government and community institutions. The World Bank-funded program provided flexible grants,
ranging from US$50,000 to US$150,000 per sub-district which were channeled straight to the
communities to finance activities that villagers defined as the most important. In addition, the
20

program set aside funds for the thousands of participating villages specifically for participatory
planning at the sub-village, village and sub-district levels. Villagers elected facilitators, a man and
a woman, who assisted with the socialization and planning process. The facilitators held group
meetings, including separate women’s meetings to discuss the needs of the village and their
development priorities. Social and technical consultants were available to help with the socialization,
planning and implementation processes. For the sub-district level planning, an inter-village forum
composed of elected village representatives made the final decisions on project funding based on
proposals that came from the communities. KDP community forums then selected members to be part
of an implementation team to manage the projects, assisted by technical facilitators provided by the
program. While the KDP suffered from numerous shortcomings, it is nonetheless an impressive
example of allowing ordinary citizens to plan and fund what development they want to see in their
communities.

2.6.2 Municipal Rural Development Planning In Brazil

The Centre for Alternative Technologies (CTA), a Brazilian NGO, has devised a participatory
process to develop municipal rural development plans (MRDP) in three municipalities as a means to
support pro-poor local development and involved contacting communities and negotiations and
networking between partners to agree on the guiding principles for the local development process
and each partner’s role; a community planning phase that involved a series of group meetings and
family interviews in every community and an initial analysis of the key issues emerging; and a final
stage that included providing feedback to the communities, deepening the analysis of the issues
identified by the communities, and the identification and prioritization of proposals to address some
of these issues. The PRAs lasted several months and concluded with the process and results being
documented in a MRDP that then became the official agreement between civil society organizations
and the municipal council. In order to ensure implementation of the plan, CTA and its partners
established a municipal council for rural development (MCRD), making use of the national legislation
that encouraged such bodies. The council is responsible for implementing the plan and also provides
a forum where the municipal policies and proposals for rural investment are discussed. The council is
composed of representatives from the town council, agricultural/forestry extension and research
services, CTA, rural workers’ unions, women’s groups and smallholder cooperatives.

2.6.3 Peri-Urban Community-Level Planning In India

In 2001, an agricultural university in the Hubli–Dharwad twin city region of India partnered with
international and local NGOs as well as community-based organizations to run a one-year
participatory action planning project (PAPP). This project operated in five peri-urban villages that
were selected based on their potential to show how trends in peri-urban areas could affect natural
resources and local livelihoods. Factors such as proximity to the city, presence of immigrant
populations, and incidence of alcoholism, gambling and other urban influences, were taken into
account. The early stages of the participatory planning process involved initial rapport-building
activities with the communities using methods like using street plays and then PRA exercises, including
group discussions with various sections of the communities to facilitate a village-based analysis of the
problems faced by different groups and the identification of community representatives to
participate in all future events. A diagnostic workshop was then held where the community
representatives presented the findings of their analyses and community, government and NGO
representatives collaboratively identified possible solutions. Finally, village representatives designed

21

and presented their own action plans and logical frameworks viz. the format of the action plans, in
their communities.

2.7 CONCLUSION

Participatory Development seeks to engage local populations in development projects. It is an
important part of the "basic needs approach" to development68 as it seeks “to give the poor a part
in initiatives designed for their benefit” in the hopes that development projects will be more
sustainable and successful if local populations are engaged in the development process. However, it
is until it is studied in the context of human rights that it becomes evident that that participation must
be appreciated by all government planning agencies.

68
Cornwall, A. (2002)'Beneficiary, Consumer, Citizen: Perspectives on Participation for Poverty Reduction. ‘Idaa Studies, pp 11.
22

-Chapter Three- PROMOTING PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AS A HUMAN RIGHT

3.0 SUMMARY

This chapter is dedicated to an in-depth examination of the international and regional standards
and human rights framework for promoting participatory development.

3.1 PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AS HUMAN RIGHT

The framing of participatory development as a right has the ultimate goal of describing the
sociopolitical process of legalization for a new generation of human rights. The concept of
participatory development being viewed as a human right is based on the two components of
participation and development, being viewed as rights, in their own right.

3.1.1 Participation

Participation is a human rights principle, and as such, it is not a gift or privilege bestowed by
government.69 In other words, it is a right for all citizens – especially the most marginalized and
vulnerable in society. “[t]here is nothing more basic to the development process than participation,”70
“Effective participation” is that which helps ensure efficiency and economic growth on the one hand,
and equity and social justice on the other.71

Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child72 lays down the principle and purpose of
meaningful participation of children and young people, and Article 7 of CEDAW on women’s rights.

The Millennium Declaration73 in Article 25 reaffirms the commitment to work collectively for more
inclusive political processes, allowing genuine participation by all citizens (and in this case, children
and young people included) in all countries.

The World Fit for Children in para 32 (i) adopted at the UN General Assembly Special Session on
Children made a strong commitment towards increasing participation of children.

As noted above, participation is a non-negotiable right. Citizens whose rights are not realized have
claims (as “claim-holders”) against those whose responsibility it is to act on it (as “duty-bearers”) –
viz, communities, civil society organizations, governments, etc.

A human rights approach to participation implies five key roles for citizens:

a) identifying unfulfilled rights and acting on them
b) claiming of rights
c) identifying capacity gaps in rights not realized and duties not performed
d) participating in the implementation of solutions
69
See UDHR, Art 1.
70
J. Brian Atwood, U.S. Agency for Int’l Dev., Statement of Principles on Participatory
Development (1993), http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACF577.pdf.
71
id
72
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989
73
UNGA R 55/2
23

e) involving in monitoring, evaluating and reporting

3.1.2 Participation in the Context of the UN Programming Process

Participation is also important for guaranteeing developmental programmes – a principle that has
been adopted as a “common understanding” within the UN system.

Participation is fundamental to human-rights based approach to programming and it is laid down as
one of the five basic elements of the HRBA (others include: express linkage to rights, accountability,
equality and non-discrimination, and empowerment).

In the Common Understanding Document74 it is stated that “development cooperation contributes to
the development of the capacities of 'duty bearers’ to meet their obligations and/or of ‘right holders’
to claim their rights”.

Capacities for human rights promotion and protection can be only acquired by rights-holders
through the process of their active participation in all parts of development programming.
Participation is central to the developmental approach as the development is “a process of
expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy”. The goal of development is to be free and be
able to choose and live the sort of life one wants to live. A community can be considered developed
to the extent that it ensures that its entire people are in a position to participate and shape a life of
dignity.

Participation is also important for personal development. It is only through participation that humans
develop self-confidence and skills, build competencies, form aspirations, gain confidence and attain
valuable resources. Learning - through experience – to make informed decisions, to develop stable
relationships and to take on the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, is an important component
of participation.

Participation is an essential component of successful and lasting development. Therefore, the right to
development is fulfilled through popular participation as echoed in the Arusha Declaration:

In our view, popular participation is both a means and an end. As an instrument of development,
popular participation provides the driving force for collective commitment for the determination of
people-based development processes and willingness by the people to undertake sacrifices and expand
their social energies for its execution. As an end in itself, popular participation is the fundamental right
of the people to fully participate effectively in the determination of the decision which affect their lives
at all levels and at all times.75

The Organization of African Unity (O.A.U) is determined to promote and protect human and
peoples’ rights especially the right of people to freely participate, by its affirmation in the African
Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights that: “Every citizen has the right to participate freely in the
government of his or her country, either directly or through freely chosen representatives in accordance
with the provision of the law (Article 13.1).”

74

75
http://www.crvp.org/book/Series02/II-8/chapter_ix.htm#_edn
24

Further, the role of public participation in economic and human development was enshrined in the
1990 African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and Transformation. 76 This is a
landmark document in promoting right to participatory development.

Here every African country is supposed to enact relevant laws in this respect. Member states of the
O. A. U are bound to affirm the right to development and encourage the right to participation in
their different countries. Popular participation, however, depends on the nature of the state and the
ability of government to respond to popular demands. This is possible where the government allows
the people freedom in decision making.

3.2 DEVELOPMENT AS A HUMAN RIGHT

3.2.1 Legal Basis of the Right!

The conception of right is of fundamental import in law because of the enforceability of particular
rights. Human rights are classified into three categories as per the trio-classification of rights by
Vasak.77 The first generation rights relate to the civil and political rights, guaranteed by the ICCPR;
the second generations of rights relate to the social, economic and cultural rights, guaranteed by the
ICESCR; and the third category of rights involves the collective rights and includes inter alia the right
to development and the right to a healthy living and environment.

The modern poverty reduction and development programmes often have dignity as a central theme.
Dignity is also a central theme of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the very first article of
which states that:

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”78

The concept of dignity in development has been extensively explored by many, and related to all
of the development sectors. For example, in Development with Dignity79 Amit Bhaduri argues that full
employment with dignity for all is both important and possible in India, while the UN Millennium
Project's task force on Water and Sanitation links the sector directly to dignity in the report Health,
Dignity and Development: What will it take?80.

The Asian Human Rights Commission released a statement claiming that "Human dignity is the true
measure of human development."81

The UN Charter states in its preamble that:

“...mankind thirsts for peace and development and it is in the interests of mankind that international law
directs the actions of states by imposing on them the duty to cooperate...”

The Universal Declaration reflected the immediate post-war consensus about human rights based on
what President Roosevelt described as four freedoms—including the freedom from want—which he
76
Adopted in February 1990 at the "International Conference on Popular Participation in the Recovery and Development Process in
Africa", Arusha, Tanzania, and available at http://apic.igc.org/african-initiatives/chartall.htm accessed on June 11, 2011
77
Vasak Karel, a 30 years struggle, UNESCO Corner (1977) p. 96
78
Article 1 UDHR
79
Amit Bhaduri, (2005) Development with Dignity HB, Print Price: 200.00. Author: ISBN: 81-237-4597-4. Publication: 30-11-2005
80
Goal 1 of the United Nation Millennium Development Goals
81
Communiqué issue on on July 27, 2006
25

wanted to be incorporated in an International Bill of Rights. There was no ambiguity at that time
about political and economic rights being interrelated and interdependent components of human
rights, and no disagreement that “true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and
independence.”82

Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, who was the head of the U.S. delegation during the drafting of the Universal
Declaration, first identified and advocated for the right to development when she stated, “[W]e are
writing a bill of rights for the world, and . . . one of the most important rights is the opportunity for
development.”83

The 1986 Seoul Declaration on the Right to Development,84 which stated unequivocally that the right
to development is a human right. This declaration sees development as a constant economic, political
and social process which aims to constantly improve the wellbeing of the entire population of
individuals by their active participation in the developmental process and in the distribution of the
benefits therefrom. The first article of the text of the Declaration on the Right to Development
succinctly puts forward the concept of the right to development. It states:

“The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all
peoples are entitled to participate in and contribute to and enjoy economic, social, cultural, and
political development in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.”

The right to development is a hence human right, by virtue of which “every human person and all
peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to and enjoy” that processes of development.
Further, the legal justification of the right to development is found in article 2(2) of the UN Charter
which affirms that:

“...all human beings have a responsibility for development, individually and collectively taking into a
count...their duty to their community...”

Also, Article 1 of the UNGA Resolution 41/128 of 1986 reaffirms that right in clear and
categorized terms stating that:

“...the right to development is an inalienable right by virtue of which every human being and all persons
are entitled to participate in and enjoy social, economic and political development...”

The process of development, “in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully
realized,” would lead to, according to Article 2(3) “the constant improvement of the well-being of
the entire population and of all individuals, on the basis of their active free and meaningful
participation in development and in the fair distribution of benefits resulting therefrom [emphasis
added].” Article 8 elaborates this point further by stating that the measures for realizing the right to
development shall ensure “equality of opportunity for all” in their access to basic resources,
education, health services, food, housing, employment and in the fair distribution of income.

82
State of the Union Message to Congress by President Roosevelt, January 11, 1944.
83
M. Glen Johnson, “The Contributions of Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt to the Development of International Protection for Human
Rights,” Human Rights Quarterly 9.1 (1987): 19–48.
84
The Declaration on the Right to Development was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, resolution 4/128 on
December 4, 1986 (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/74.htm). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by UN
General Assembly Resolution 217 (A) II on December 10, 1948.
26

Dissertation access to information & participatory development

Dissertation access to information & participatory development

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Dissertation access to information & participatory development

Similaire à Dissertation access to information & participatory development (20)

Plus de Ojijo P

Plus de Ojijo P (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Dissertation access to information & participatory development