|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
 |
  |
MOZAMBIQUE
Activity Data Sheet
>> AFR Regional Overview >> Mozambique Overview PROGRAM: Mozambique
TITLE AND NUMBER: Government And Civil Society Are Effective Partners In Democratic Governance at the National and Local Levels, 656-002
STATUS: Continuing
PLANNED FY 2001 OBLIGATION AND FUNDING SOURCE: $1,912,000 DA
PROPOSED FY 2002 OBLIGATION AND FUNDING SOURCE: $1,350,000 DA
INITIAL OBLIGATION: FY 1996 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: FY 2003Summary: Mozambique is a model of democratic success in Africa, albeit a new and fragile one. With multi-party democracy only eight years old, the immaturity of democratic institutions is widely evident in the executive branch, the justice sector, the legislature, the media, political parties and civil society. USAID provided critical support for the 1994 and 1999 national elections, but focuses its assistance on building the key institutions required to sustain democratic governance. Training and institution building for the nation's first multi-party parliament, civil society and political parties are primary democracy-building projects. This USAID program supports U.S. national interests of maintaining peace and democracy by promoting pluralism, transparency, rule of law and accountability. USAID activities build the capacity of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civic movements to engage government in substantive dialogue on key issues such as constitutional reform, political issues, judicial reform and economic policies. In FY 2001, democracy and governance funding of $1,912,000 from the Development Assistance account will support these activities.
Key Results: This program is achieving two results: (1) effective civil society participation and leadership in legislative debates, political decisions and public dialogue; and (2) increasingly capable and accountable government institutions in the legislative, executive and judicial branches, focused on service delivery, representation and citizen interests.
Performance and Prospects: In December 1999, 75% of registered voters cast ballots in the second national election, under the watchful eyes of over 2,000 domestic observers mobilized by Mozambican NGOs. USAID was the principal supporter of the domestic observation effort as well as a campaign finance fund established by parliament and funded by the Government of Mozambique. With USAID technical advice, the two major political parties accounted for 100% of monies received from the fund, a sharp improvement in accountability from the 1994 election fund.
With USAID assistance, the major political parties improved their campaigning with better organizational skills and issue-based campaign platforms. As a result, both parties gained votes in traditional strongholds of their opponents. The main opposition party, the National Resistance for Mozambique (RENAMO) successfully formed in 1999, and sustained throughout 2000, an electoral coalition with 10 smaller parties. This opened up its policy formulation process and leadership to women and youth members, and initiated steps towards the election of party officials and candidates. The ruling party, the Liberation Front for Mozambique (FRELIMO), demonstrated highly inclusive policy formulation processes, maintained an active member outreach program throughout the country, and held elections for party leaders and the selection of party candidates.
USAID is a major contributor to the parliamentary modernization program. The new parliament presented many challenges, with a 36% turnover in legislators and RENAMO delegates' refusal to participate in constructive parliamentary activity in protest of the 1999 election results. Civil society testimony on pending legislation in parliament declined at the end of the 1999 legislative cycle when attention in parliament turned to the election and legislation was postponed. However, civil society participation in policy analysis through the media and executive branch continued strong through the election and post-election period. Despite the opposition protest, the parliament continued to provide substantive input into legislation proposed by the executive branch, demonstrating increased assertiveness in fulfilling its oversight function. The legislature's increased confidence and independence was demonstrated in its sharp criticism of government inaction in a major bank fraud case, which prompted the President to replace the Attorney General and his deputies. A well-respected Attorney-General was appointed.
A new activity began in FY 2000 to address the high profile problem of corruption that negatively impacts both democratization and economic growth. The activity supports the creation of a civil society watchdog organization and a corruption investigation unit within the Attorney General's Office. Two additional activities began in FY 2001 to support civil society initiatives to foster political dialogue among government, political parties, private sector, and civil society. In the short run, these activities will help mend political relationships and reduce political tensions. Over the longer term, they will firmly establish the role of civil society in political decision making.
Progress indicators show that citizens, through civil society organizations and the media, are increasingly successful in instigating investigations of government misconduct. USAID's FY 2000 target of 25 such investigations was met, reflecting the increasingly assertive posture of the independent media, watchdog and human rights groups. Investigations in FY 2000 found misuse of public funds, abuse of power by elected officials, and human rights violations. In comparison with previous years, there were fewer cases of abuse of power, but a slight increase in human rights violations by the police, including six cases of election-related violence, pointing to the need for comprehensive justice sector reform.
With USAID support, the ability of civil society organizations to form coalitions and effectively press for both reform and government accountability has strengthened and shows that citizens' expectations of their elected government are increasing. There is more freedom for citizens to criticize failures in transparency, accountability and representation. Political parties are more focused on issues and responsive to citizens. Even with the post-elections political turmoil, there is no evidence of increased authoritarian or military tendencies in either the government or the opposition. Despite signs of turbulence in the process of democratization in Mozambique during 2000, the level of political competition and tension that goes with it are indicative of healthy democratic development. At the same time, the fragility of key institutions, witnessed by the frequent paralysis in the legislature this year due to elevated political tension, demonstrates the ongoing need for external assistance to build strong democratic foundations.
In FY 2002, USAID will continue programs to work with the national legislature; develop civil society advocacy; develop more effective judicial processes; and strengthen political dialogue through public debate and party development. These democracy and governance programs are national in scope.
Possible Adjustment to Plans: None.
Other Donor Programs: Other donors include the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Austria, Switzerland, the European Union, the United Nations Development Program and the World Bank. USAID chairs the technical working group on parliamentary assistance and the democracy and governance donor working group.
Principal Contractors, Grantees or Agencies: Implementing partners are the State University of New York Research Foundation, the Center for the Study of Democracy and Development and the National Democratic Institute. Small grants and contracts to local organizations are being used to build Mozambican participation and leadership.
FY 2002 Performance Tables
Performance Measures:
Indicator FY97 (Actual) FY98 (Actual) FY99 (Actual) FY00 (Actual) FY00 (Plan) FY01 (Plan) FY02 (Plan) Indicator 1: Citizens perceive that public issues are addressed in a participatory manner involving local governments, civil society, and traditional authorities -- Mission focus area 36 NA 50 NA NA 60* NA Indicator 2: Civil society initiated investigations of alleged government misconduct at local and national levels 12 19 23 25 25 30 35 Indicator 3: Increased effectiveness of civil society organizations' management 5 6.3 6.5 8.8 8 9 9.5 Indicator Information:
Indicator Level (S) or (IR) Unit of Measure Source Indicator Description Indicator 1: IR Percent USAID-commissioned public opinion survey every two years. Answer to question: "Have citizens participated in decision making on public issues (e.g. health, education, water, roads, etc.) with government, traditional authorities, NGOs, or other associations?" Mission focus area includes Nampula, Zambezia, Sofala and Manica provinces. Margin of error is 8% at this level. Indicator 2: IR Number Annual assessment based on media reports: at least 2 media reports must be cited, of which at least 1 indicates an investigation has been launched by an appropriate government institution Number of investigations, disaggregated by type of organization initiating investigation and type of misconduct. For this indicator, civil society includes human rights and "watchdog" groups, and the media. Indicator 3: IR Score: 0-12 Annual assessment by MER contractor and implementing partner Average score for 6-12 CSOs on criteria such as: existence of organizational chart; annual plan of activities disseminated to members; annual financial report; annual external audit; percent of staff with written job descriptions; up-to-date inventory of assets; up-to-date legal registration; and percent of members who paid dues in preceding year.
U.S. Financing
(In thousands of dollars)
Obligations Expenditures Unliquidated Through September 30, 1999 11,555 DA 8,087 DA 3,468 DA 0 CSD 0 CSD 0 CSD 6,250 ESF 5,678 ESF 572 ESF 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 FSA 0 FSA 18,200 DFA 18,200 DFA 0 DFA Fiscal Year 2000 1,872 DA 3,800 DA 0 CSD 0 CSD 800 ESF 546 ESF 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 FSA 0 DFA 0 DFA Through September 30, 2000 13,427 DA 11,887 DA 1,540 DA 0 CSD 0 CSD 0 CSD 7,050 ESF 6,224 ESF 826 ESF 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 FSA 0 FSA 18,200 DFA 18,200 DFA 0 DFA Prior Year Unobligated Funds 0 DA 0 CSD 0 ESF 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 DFA Planned Fiscal Year 2001 NOA 1,912 DA 0 CSD 0 ESF 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 DFA Total Planned Fiscal Year 2001 1,912 DA 0 CSD 0 ESF 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 DFA Future Obligations Est. Total Cost Proposed Fiscal Year 2002 NOA 1,350 DA 2,000 DA 18,689 DA 0 CSD 0 CSD 0 CSD 0 ESF 0 ESF 7,050 ESF 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 SEED 0 FSA 0 FSA 0 FSA 0 DFA 0 DFA 18,200 DFA
 |
|||
Last Updated on: May 29, 2002 |
