Civil society organizations call for amendment of the law on civil society organizations

Amid concerns about government influence

Amid growing concerns about abuse of power by the government, civil society organisations (CSOs) are demanding an amendment to the CSO (Amendment) Act, 2022.

They argue that the current structure of the United Nations Organisation Authority (CSOA), in which the board is composed mainly of government-appointed members and chaired by the interior minister, creates a risk of biased decision-making that could favour state interests over the public good.

The law currently mandates that only two of the seven board members must be representatives of civil society organisations, raising concerns that CSOA decisions could disproportionately favour the government. These concerns are exacerbated by the board being chaired by the Home Secretary, who is seen by some as a direct conduit for government influence.

In 2022, the 7th Session of the Third Parliament amended the original CSO Act of 2007. The Act allowed board members to elect a chairperson, providing a degree of independence from government interference. However, recent changes have caused concern among CSOs, who are now demanding more equitable representation to ensure fair and balanced governance.

“There is an urgent need for civil society organisations to come together and push for the amendment of the Civil Society Organisations Act in the next two to three years when the government is open to discussions to improve the overall governance system,” the senior executive said.

The concern is that without timely changes, the decisions of the CSOA, influenced by a board consisting of just two CSO representatives and a ministerial chairman, will continue to favour the government.

Another executive director said that Parliament should amend the Civil Society Organisations Act to ensure more equitable representation and decision-making powers within civil society organisations.

Under the 2007 Act, board members elected a chairman, secretary and treasurer from among themselves, providing a balanced management structure. The inclusion of a senior member from the Ministry of Finance was intended to provide oversight without overwhelming influence.

But since the 2022 amendment, which provides for seven board members, the balance has shifted. “The CSOA board is for the CSO, not the government,” noted one executive director, proposing at least equal representation, if not a majority, of CSO members on the board. They also suggested that the chair should be elected or rotated to ensure diverse leadership perspectives.

Concerns have been raised in Parliament debates about unregistered civil society organisations, transparency in the management of funds and the activities of civil society organisations. Regulatory challenges include the proliferation of informal groups, unauthorised fundraising and the complexity of monitoring different sources of funding.

One of the key disagreements was the composition of the CSOA board. The National Council (NC) proposed a seven-person board chaired by the Home Secretary and including two CSO representatives. The Assembly (NA) responded by proposing that the Home Secretary be the board chair and that three CSO representatives from government agencies be. This disagreement created 24 contentious clauses, requiring the establishment of a joint committee to resolve them.

The former government official justified the inclusion of the Interior Minister as ex officio chairman by stating that the intention was to regulate bureaucracy while promoting civil society organizations. They argued that the presence of a politician on the board of a civil society organization could help promote the interests of the civil society organization.

The role of civil society organizations in governance

Civil society organizations play an important role in complementing government efforts, promoting civic space, and providing checks and balances on government functions. However, some fear that civil society organizations, as a third sector, may become too powerful, challenging bureaucratic interests.

“The civil society sector has not benefited from a policy environment that would allow it to grow, mature and flourish,” said one executive director, noting that the development of civil society organisations has been stunted.

Civil society organizations also face internal challenges, including allegations that they are family-run and lack transparency and integrity. During a recent workshop in Paro, journalists questioned civil society officials about family-run organizations. A CSOA official admitted that while no formal complaints had been received, the problem was an open secret.

The former executive director stressed that governance, not family involvement, is key. “If CSOs maintain strong governance and independent audits, they can be effective regardless of family involvement. Many CSOs are born out of personal struggles and passions,” she noted.

The Trust Fund Dilemma

A significant hurdle for CSOs is the CSO Trust Fund, established under the CSO Act. This fund, according to executive directors, was supposed to provide financial stability to CSOs, but recent changes have drastically increased the required trust amounts—from Nu 50,000 for MBOs to Nu 4 million for PBOs, combining trust and operational costs.

“These numbers are overwhelming, especially for organizations that struggle to cover even basic monthly expenses,” said one program employee.

The revised policy raises critical questions about feasibility and timeliness. Authorities set these high funding thresholds without adequately consulting civil society organizations or clearly examining their capacities and needs, according to executive directors. Many in civil society organizations believe that there was insufficient transitional period for fundraising and adaptation, making the requirements seem more like obstacles than supports.

Contribution by Rinzin Wangchuk with support from Bhutan Media Foundation, Helvetas Bhutan and the European Union