We The People: Engaging Citizens in Public Sector Management

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Charles Warria on December 15, 2010 at 2:02am

I believe that the time is ripe for citizens involvement and participation in governance. In efforts at improving public accountability, the Kenya Government introduced the Performance Contracting approach to public service delivery. Each government office is required to develop and make public, clear indicators and results that they intend to achieve within each financial year. Alongside these, each government office is required to post its service charter, detailing all the services that the citizens are entitled to, under that particular office, in a public arena, where everyone can access it and demand for the services. Each year, the Government awards best-performing public offices, using a public assessment criterion, after each office has presented its performance report to the public for scrutiny and validation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hannah J Cooper on December 15, 2010 at 4:23pm

Dear Charles,

 

Thank you for sharing this information about the Kenyan Government's work in engaging citizens in governance and decision making. What do you think the impetus was behind implementing these approaches? Was there a request from citizens or did it come from internal government leadership, or perhaps a combination of both? What are some of the best ways to lay the ground work to ensuring citizen engagement?

 

I look forward to hearing from you!

 

Hannah

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles Warria on December 16, 2010 at 1:34am

Dear Hannah,

 

The involvement of citizens in the accountability processes of governance and service delivery in Kenya, was a culmination of many years of civil society struggle for change of government. In 2002, December, Kenya went to elections and changed a government that had been ruling for 24yrs. The citizens yearned for change and they voted for reform agents and activitists, most of whom, had been active in the civil society. The new government opened up space for citizen participation in governance and Parliament responded by enacting necessary legislation to enable the citizens to hold the government accountable to its promises on transparency, accountability and effective service delivery. It was more like a revolution of sorts, involving a receptive government and an informed and active citizenry.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Abiyot Dagne on December 16, 2010 at 1:34am

I would like to share some ideas with regard to citizens engagement in Ethiopian context.In Ethiopia, citizen’s have a right to participate and engage effectively and
meaningfully in the affairs of their own development, either directly or
through legitimate intermediate institutions that represent their interests.
Local development plans shall in particular, reflect the voices, interests
and development needs of the community. Communities shall be provided
with adequate space to participate in the planning, execution and
monitoring of development programs.The interest to participate in decision making process,democratization and other development activities was the intention and the will of the Ethiopian citizens at all.It is entitled with  the countries supreme law i.e constitution.

Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia:
Article 12:
“1. The conduct of affairs of the government shall be transparent.”
“2. Any public official or elected representative is accountable for any failure
in official duties.”
Section 4 Article 50:
“State government shall be established at state and other administrative
levels that they find necessary. Adequate power shall be granted to the
lowest unit of government to enable the people to participate directly in the
administration of such units.”

To strengthen the citizens participation the Ethiopian government Introduces BSC(balance score card) .Each government organization is obliged to implement and develop result based performance evaluation.At the grass root level i.e beginning from kebele level the government also organize such as,Women's league,Youth's league and others to confirm citizens engagement in the country

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tamirat Yacob on January 1, 2011 at 1:07pm

Dear Abiyot,

 

Thank you for sharing us the parts of the constition in ethiopia. I am delighted to read about it once agin and see that, on Article 12: 2 says “Any public official or elected representative is accountable for any failure in official duties.” It is really important to enshrine such things in the constitution and I am happy to see it in our constitution to ensure that officials and representatives are to be held accountable to results. But my question for long has been have we really implemented that and have we ever seen any held accountable for the failure of some programs and activities? I haven’t seen any so far. And even the intent to be more result oriented and result centered is there some are not delivering what they are supposed to. And that puts many in to scrutiny and need some measures to be taken to assure better results are to be achieved. Here also comes the issue of corruption by representatives, officials and experts, though recently the government seems to implement the registration of property by officials and leaders to fight against corruption.  Hence, one of the suggestions that I put forward in one of my blog posts about the MDGs performance in Ethiopia was accountability and leadership from all corners should be in place even for better governance. We serve the poor, the rich and all, as we are public servants, we must be held accountable and the rule should be the same to all: one standard for all to ensure accountability!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tenaw Wallelgn Derseh on December 16, 2010 at 4:41am

First I would like to say thank you for your information, then I want to say some thing about citizen involvement and participation in Ethiopia.In Ethiopia citizens participate from the grass root unto Federal level in different situation,why because Ethiopian government give the right to the citizen to participate on their issues,affairs by considering every cost and benefit due to such issues are their own.Ethiopian government creates good environment for citizens participation by divining the country in to different regions or state administrative based on their culture, language and geographical administrations.This condition creates good environment for citizen to participate in each and every activities,for example in the election of their leaders from the grass root level up to Federal level , in the developing of their on culture,language and resource mobilization based on the community.This makes Ethiopia is on of the country which have very diversified people within having their own culture and the citizen live by love and peace in the way of diversity by unity and they said that our diversity is our beauty . Due to this and other reason Ethiopia prepared the 5th National Federalism conference for the first time in the continent or in African land by history,Ethiopian government and others believe that this is the result of citizens participation, Ethiopian has recorded two digit economic growth,democratic election, malty party system ,have built different dams, electric power generations and other good practices ,these and others the result of citizens participation.Now Ethiopian government preparing the next fifth year plan which is known as Growth and Transformation plan.now we are found at the end of preparation of this document,in the preparation of this document the participation of the citizen takes place up to grass root level and it takes not less than four months. I think it can be an example of best practice for the other countries.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mugunga Matabaro on December 16, 2010 at 7:52am

Thank you very much Hannah for this important theme. This subject actually catches my attention because it relates to my current daily work. I am working with Strengthening Civic Participation Project.
The Strengthening Civic Participation in Rwanda project, with support from the MCC Threshold Program, is built on the Rwandan Decentralization project by strengthening the ability - and will - of local government to engage citizens in decision and policy making processes, while at the same time provides civil society groups with requisite skills and competence to successfully engage their local government. SCPR is countrywide project which cover all 30 districts of the country and will work with Civil Society Organizations.Through its practical, systematic processes and methodologies, the project core team is building a deeper civic culture in Rwanda. The approach and activities, which provide more opportunities for citizens to insert their voice into local policy and development decisions and provide local government with the means and know-how to open up space for citizens to participate, foster the self-determination and self -organization of society integral to viable democratic political cultures.
Back to the citizens engagement in Rwanda, briefly, Rwanda is progressively engaging citizens participation through the current existing mechanisms and administration structures and sectors interventions.
In addition to the sector specific participation mechanisms, there are additional mechanisms at the community level that provide a framework within which local problems are addressed. These mechanisms are Ubudehe, Umuganda, Gacaca, Abunzi.A part Ubudehe,currently, the rest are not institutionalized although it is argued that they contribute to local area development and deserve to be formally integrated in the national and local level development programs.
1) Ubudehe: Most stakeholder participants perceived Ubudehe as a very important mechanism for addressing the needs and considering participation of the very poor people in the community.
2) Umuganda: is a traditional practice of collective word for the benefit of the community. Presently, at national level, it takes place once a month at national level.
3) Gacaca: Overall, communities appreciate and participate in proceedings.This mechanism is highly credited for promoting justice, unity and reconciliation.
4) Abunzi: Are committee of people elected to serve as conflict mediators.Although not full operational in all districts.
Finally, Citizen Engagement in public finance has been viewed as a powerful mechanism that can strengthen democracies and improve public transparency and accountability.
Other comments to come.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hannah J Cooper on December 16, 2010 at 5:55pm

Dear Charles, Abiyot, Tenaw, and Mugunga,

 

Thank you all for providing your comments and insights on what is taking place in your countries. I will respond to each one of your in futher details, but I just have one quick question for Mugunga to start.

 

Mugunga - I've heard of Gacaca before (I believe through a very interesting BBC documentary). I have also attended a presentation on Imihigo - which I find fascinating. Do you know about this and can you tell us a little bit about the Imihigo approach in Rwanda? I think that members would really appreciate learning more about it as well!

 

Thanks so much!

 

Hannah

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mugunga Matabaro on December 17, 2010 at 2:35am

Thank you Hannah for seeking further clarifications and deeper understanding on Gacaca and Imihigo (Performance contracts) in Rwanda. Here below is detailed comments and analysis:

1. Gacaca Courts in Rwanda:

The Gacaca court is part of a system of community justice inspired by tradition and established in 2001 in Rwanda, in the wake of the 1994 Rwandan Tutsi Genocide, when around  1,000,000 Rwandans, mostly Tutsi, were slaughtered.

Originally, the Gacaca settled village or familial disputes. The courts were informal means of solving disputes around issues like theft, marital issues, land rights, and property damage. They were constituted as village assemblies, presided by the ancients, where each member of the community could request to speak. The trials were meant to promote reconciliation and justice of the perpetrator in front of family and neighbors.

Well-respected elders, known as Inyangamugayo, were elected based on their honesty by the people of the community. The name Gacaca originates from Rwanda's national language, Kinyarwanda, where, translated roughly into English means short, clean cut grass or "umucaca." It is symbolic for a gathering place for elders to sit on and judge the trial. Inyangamugayo would assemble all parties to a crime and mediate a resolution involving reparations or some act of contrition. The Gacaca court is thus a system of grassroots legal bodies inspired by tradition power structures.

By 2000, approximately 120,000 alleged genocidaires were crammed into Rwanda's prisons and communal jails (Reyntjens & Vandeginste 2005, 110). From December 1996 to December 2006, the courts managed to try about 10,000 suspects (Human Rights Watch 2004, 18): at that rate it would take another 110 years to prosecute all the prisoners.

However, the courts needed a more expeditious means of delivering justice. In response, Rwanda implemented the Gacaca court system, which has evolved from traditional cultural communal law enforcement procedures. The Gacaca courts are a method of transitional justice, designed to promote healing and moving on from the crisis.

The "mission" of this system is to achieve "truth, justice, [and] reconciliation." It aims to promote community healing by making the punishment of perpetrators faster and less expensive to the state.

The "Gacaca Courts" system has the following objectives:

• The reconstruction of what happened during the genocide
• The speeding up of the legal proceedings by using as many courts as possible
• The reconciliation of all Rwandans and building their unity

We can ask ourselves how Gacaca works: The Gacaca courts are meant to provide smaller courts to relieve the burden of the larger courts. Criminals are charged with acts against humanity, such as murder and serious assault. These courts are not allowed to try accused rapists, however. The idea is to let the village courts resolve these issues and hopefully provide some reconciliation. The trials are meant to promote reconciliation and justice. The defendant is accused and brought to trial. The trial is held in public, where survivors and the victims' families can confront the accused.

The current Rwandan Gacaca court system, as established in March 2001, involves both plaintiffs and witnesses in an interactive court proceeding against alleged criminals who took part in the genocide.[5] The judges now qualified as Inyangamugayo, who also have basic judicial training, are among 250,000 individuals elected by Rwandans to serve in the Gacaca courts, which are in charge of judging two (of the three) categories of people accused of implication in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide.

There are three levels of jurisdiction for the Gacaca Courts: the Cell's Gacaca Courts, the Sector's Gacaca Court, and the Sector's Gacaca Courts for Appeal.  These are then organized into 3 parts: a general assembly, which collects facts and establishes the lists of victims and perpetrators, among other things; the Bureau of the Gacaca jurisdiction, which is made of 19 members elected by the General Assembly; and the co-ordination committee, which is designed to coordinate the Gacaca Court's activities.

Each gacaca court has nine judges and has the power to sentence criminals up to life imprisonment, but not the death penalty.

Their activities are organized into 3 steps:

1. Collection of information relating to the genocide
2. Categorization of persons prosecuted for having committed genocide or having played a role in different genocidal crimes.
3. Trial of cases falling under their competence (or jurisdiction).

2. IMIHIGO (Performance Contracts) in Rwanda

Imihigo is a tradition that Rwanda has institutionalized as a means to enhance local government reform and stimulate development. It draws on a long-standing cultural practice in Rwanda whereby two parties publicly commit themselves to the achievement of a particular task. Failing to meet these public commitments leads to dishonor, not only for the individual party but for the community. Imihigo means a pronounced commitment.

Following local governance reforms and the 2006 elections, through president Kagame’s initiative during his meeting with the newly elected local government leaders, Imihigo concept as a tool for accelerating development was adopted. Rwanda’s Ministry for Local Government (MINALOC) and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning consulted with district leaders worked out how this concept can be developed and become operational.

Imihigo is as old as pre-colonial Rwanda. Imihigo is a cultural practice in the ancient tradition of Rwanda where an individual would set himself targets to be achieved within a specific period of time and to do so by following some principles and having determination to overcome the possible challenges.

In the modern day Rwanda, the Imihigo practice was adopted as a tool for planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation to accelerate socio-economic development and poverty reduction. Imihigo has a strong focus on results which makes it an invaluable tool in the planning, accountability and monitoring and evaluation processes.

When elaborating Rwanda’s imihigo or performance contracts, each local government administrative entity analyses its local problems and seeks solutions taking into  account national priorities as highlighted in the International and National strategic documents such as the MDGs, Vision 2020, EDPRS, District Development Plans (DDPs) and Sector Development Plans. The Imihigo, at both planning and reporting phases, are presented to the public for purposes of accountability and transparency. The imihigo process ensures the full participation and ownership of citizens and other stakeholders since priorities are developed from grassroots level.

The major objective of imihigo is to collectively dertemine local priorities taking into account local potentiality, reality, means of achieving the set targets. In this process ownership of programs by citizens and other stakeholders is enhanced, this promotes; accountability, transparence, result oriented performance, instill innovation, encourage competitiveness; also imihigo promote zeal and determination to achieve set goals.

2.1.Principles of Imihigo

Rwandans embrace Imihigo as a performance tool, following the principles below:

• Voluntary: It is a choice of the citizens, guidance is provided to ensure national priorities are matching with local ones;
• Ambitious: You promise/vow to achieve only what you do not already have;
• Excellence: Imihigo is about outstanding performance: something worth of praise.

2.2.The role of citizens

Bottom-up approach is exercised during planning, implementation and evaluation stages of Imihigo.

The process begins at the lowest administrative entity-village level (umudugudu) whereby the community sits together with their local leaders and collectively analyse their problems, propose solutions into implementable actions and monitor implementation. Citizens at grassroots level prioritize activities that can address their major problems and challenges they encounter, activities which answer their problems and have requisite means and capacity for implementation are given higher priority. Priority activities citizens have no means or control to implement are submitted to the higher level (Cell/Akagari).for consideration in their Imihigo. The process goes like that up to the district level. Councilors who represent citizens in the higher levels follow up and ensure their priorities are considered by higher levels, and during their council meetings and accountability days (open days) they report what was considered by higher and give explaination if any priority was not considered. The administrative entity within the local government signs the imihigo with the subsequent administrative authority while councils ensure their implementation and reporting to the citizens. This has not only boosted local development in Rwanda but also, increased accountability – “principal and agent relations”.

At the district level, the imihigo is signed between the District mayor who represents the local government and the President of the Republic representing both electorate and the government. The signed contracts between the President and Mayors commit both central and local governments. The Central government ensures conducive environment is available to local government - avail the necessary funding and other assistance to the district in time in order to achieve the set targets within the time frame.

Imihigo is evaluated quarterly by all authorities in each administrative entity as auto-evaluation at local government level. Thereafter, each administrative entity is evaluated by the next higher level to measure performance realized visa-a-vie pledges made. At district level, despite evaluation made by the council, national evaluation is carried out twice a year by quality assurance team comprised of experts from the President’s Office, the Prime Minister’s Office, Ministry of Local Government, ministry of Finance, Rwandese Association for Local Government, civil society and private sector. Presenting official evaluations of the district is concurrently conducted with signing the new performance contract (imihigo) and with the President of the Republic and hence re-launch the cycle. This ceremony is always live and citizens are not only represented during the ceremony but also contribute ideas by calling on tall-free phone.

As one District Mayor explained, “Imihigo is a response to the problems in our community. Imihigo is both a rights-based planning tool, as well as a social contract between parties. The overall aim of Community Dialogue is to increase the level of concern in community about the issues that affect them and to catalyze actions that improve their standards of living”.

It is necessary to understand the difference between the action plan and imihigo. The action plan is a set of activities supposed to be realized within a determined period, in this particular case a period of one year, whereas imihigo are a subset of the action plan showing priority activities to be used as a performance measure.

The action plan may contain additional number of activities of routine nature such as payment of wages and salaries whereas the imihigo are mainly focused on key activities that have a significant impact on economic development and poverty reduction, good governance and social welfare.

2.3.Major factors to consider when selecting Imihigo

Before selecting activities to be included in Imihigo, the following are put into considerations, whether;

·         The activity impacts positively on the welfare of the local population (conflict resolution, unity and reconciliation, security, good governance, justice, education (enrolment, academic performance, class rooms construction especially 9YBE), health, economic factors like water access, transport, rural electrification, to mention but a few.

·         It creates jobs (employment) for the local population;

·         It is a priority for the local population in the area;

·         The activities or results are sustainable;

·         There is sense of ownership for the local population;

·         It helps to achieve or linked to the national targets national and international priorities, programs or policies (MDGs, EDPRS, Vision 2020);

.    The resources for implementation are determined;

Activities that answer positively most of the questions outlined above should be given priority consideration.

2.4.Achievements of Imihigo

From 2006, the districts were guided into the preparation of the performance contracts or Imihigo which were publicly signed on the 4th of April 2006 for the first time. Since 2006 the approach has registered the following achievements by local government authorities (Village, Cell, Sector, Districts):

·         Enhanced creativity and innovation leading to good performance in various socio-economical and political sectors mainly unity and reconciliation, infrastructure development countrywide, agriculture and livestock productivity, environment protection through terracing and re-afforestattion, education by reducing dropouts, increasing enrolment, construction of classrooms for 9YBE, resolved communal conflicts and reduced unnecessary court backlogs to mention a few.

Success stories in Rwanda are enormous and obvious to national and international lens. Latest reports indicate remarkable improvement in food security (according to ActionAid 2010 Hunger FREE scorecard report – Rwanda jumped some 6 positions to rank 11), improved competitiveness and innovations by (Global Price Index), environmental management, doing business, to mention but a few. This has been possible because of competitive atmosphere and all-inclusive participation of all actors in local governments through Imihigo approach;

·         stronger focus on results orientation has been fostered where citizens priority activities depending on their level of importance and available resources to implement them;

·         Strengthens accountability as demonstrated through Councils and Public Accountability days. This is locally held in spirit of presenting exemplary performance for Imihigo locally called “Kurata Ibigwi’’;

·         Increased participation and ownership of citizens and other stakeholders since priorities are developed from grassroots level and monitor implementation;

·         The rate and quality of execution of national programs is high due to participatory planning, prioritization, implantation and evaluation. That is why cleanliness, security, and social cohesion are progressively attained in Rwanda than most of African countries.

 

References:

1. Ministry of Local Government website,
2. minaloc.gov.rw/IMG/pdf_Imihigo_Concept_Note_22_feb_2010_1_.pd
3. www.newtimes.co.rw4.Imvaho nshya,  April 25, 2009
4. The New Vision Online
5. UNDP-Rwanda
6. Rwandagateway.org

I hope this gives some clarifications and reasonable understanding to all members.

Good day,

Mugunga

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mugunga Matabaro on March 3, 2012 at 12:43am

Thank you very much Hannah for bringing back this interesting discussion, and I am very interested in these case studies you provided. and I apologize of getting back to the discussion been very busy with this decentralization and citizen participation work.

To me decentralization and local development mean bringing all services closer to citizens, whereby a citizen is served at local level, here there is no interest to go the central government for a simple service. For example here in Rwanda, citizens are getting services ( health, education, medical insurance, travel papers- Passport or Laisser passer are provided at district level not at the Ministry level. In Rwanda most of the Ministries have decentralized units at district level.Thus Decentralization and Local development is the way of facilitating development and service delivery at local level.

Another aspect, is the propcess of giving autonomy to the local decentralized entities. Being able to decide their priorties themselves following main lines drawn by central government.And Finally, The way of increqsing own revenues- resources a local level shoud be also be the motive behind decentralization and development. Here in rwanda districts have their own revenues and they can decide what to use that resource into their development priorities.

Briefly this is my contribution on the discussion, for further clarifications you may have don't hesitate to contact me.

Mugunga Matabaro

Decentralization Technical Advisor-GIZ Rwanda

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Netsanet Deneke Morie on December 17, 2010 at 1:59am

Dear Hannah J Kooper

Thank you for bringing an interesting topic to be discussed. After reading Abiyot’s and Tenaw’s views on this discussion, I have decided to share my idea on some specific examples and efforts of Ethiopian government tried to engage citizens.  I had been worked in local NGO that used to pilot the Social Accountability Project, aimed to protect basic services in Ethiopia by participating citizens. The pilot project was funded by World Bank and other multilateral donors for CSOs and NGOs; and implemented on all regions of the country. There are also various tools to evaluate service provision like Participatory Budgeting, Budget Tracking, and Citizen Report Card. Our organization was used Community Score Card (CSC) tool to evaluate the Agricultural service provision quality at community level. The CSC tool has been used in various countries to evaluate the service provision status especially it is very easy to use and less complicated in rural context. So we preferred this tool to evaluate the agricultural and natural resource conservation service provision quality in rural area.

 

The service providers and service users (local community) will evaluate the service provision status independently and the role of the NGO is only providing training how to fill the score card and facilitating. The evaluation will be based on input tracking matrix that describes the service indicator, the government standard, existing service provision and the gap between the standard and existing service provision. Finally both parties will sit together to see what they scored on various services types. This stage is called interface meeting that both service providers and service users discuss on the service provision quality. The discussion needs facilitator’s effort to come up with constructive ideas and results that will be used for future planning and to improve service provision. At the end of the project, both service providers and the community representatives agreed to improve service provision quality by taking corrective measures.

The very interesting thing that I got to share with you is that due to lack of community engagement or participation a lot of efforts that had been done by government were taken as unimportant or useless thing by the service users or the local communities. And also very simple issues that could be solved by discussion from both side was taken as the major development problem of the area for a long time. In my opinion it is a time to stop a kind of “I know for you” thinking approach. This is what the Ethiopian Government is doing right now. There is national level discussion on the growth and transformation plan through different media and technology. So that, in Ethiopia every citizen has the room to be informed and to be engaged on the implementation of the 5 years growth and transformation plan that I believe enhance the country’s capacity to achieve the MDGs. Let us take and see few efforts that Ethiopia is achieving on the MDGs during last few years from UNDP report.

 

When we see the past trend on Ethiopian effort to achieve the MDG, much of the decline in national poverty is attributed to a decline in poverty in rural areas. The decline in rural poverty is substantial; and the decline is much higher during the SDPRP period. The head count, poverty gap, and poverty severity indices in 2004/05 for rural areas is lower by 13%, 31%, and 41%, respectively than the levels in 1999/00. The difference in the indices between 2004/05 and 1999/00 is statistically significant.

 

In case of Goal 2, access to primary education, as measured by enrollment in grades 1-8, has increased in 2007/08 with promoting universal primary education and community control over schools and resources. During 2007/08, total primary enrollment reached 15,341,121 pupils, which brought up the Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER) to 96.7% (i.e. girls 91.0%, boys 102.4%) from its level of 91.6% in 2006/07. Apparently, the change in net enrollment ratio (NER) for primary education (1-8) followed a parallel trend with that of gross enrollment ratio, The NER has increased by 5.8 percentage points pushing it up to a level of 84.4% in 2007/08 from 78.6% in 2006/07, which indicate an encouraging trend in the age structure of primary school students. During 2007/08, 1,992 primary schools have been constructed, which brought up the total number of primary schools in the country to 23,235. This progress has been supplemented by the fact that 80% of the constructed schools are located in rural areas and with improved awareness of the community towards girls' education. This achievement is by engaging the citizens to contribute and construct the primary schools at every kebeles (lower level administrative unit). So it is very helpful to participate or to engage citizens in order to achieve MDG’s.

Therefore, this is the right time to engage citizens in policy and program decision making to harness the development efforts and to improve the livelihood of the society. Furthermore, the basic essence of all development actors is to bring development toward the citizens, engaging them on all level of policy formulation and program planning and implementation will be win-win situation for both actors (government, CSO’s, NGO’s and others) and the citizens.

 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tamirat Yacob on January 1, 2011 at 1:40pm

Dear Netsante,

 

thank you for sharing the experience you had in working in local NGOs. One thing that I woul dlik eyou to explain more is that, if you are still negaged at that level, what is the level of the locals engagment in the GTP preparation? I have some experience what the consultation looks like in Parliament and the consultation we had in the Capital, Addis Ababa.

 

Looking forward to hearing from you.

 

All the best,

 

 

Tamirat 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page