How can ordinary citizens pressure local officialstorespond to their demands? The people from the province of North Cotabato in Mindanao seemsto have found a solution and areisattempting to further enhance it.
This case is about how an organization attempts a strategic shift: from pressure/ protest-only approach to employing an integrated approach: pressure politics and constructive engagement. This case investigates what the enabling factors were of such a strategic shift and the challenges involved in going through with it. Since the strategic shift also involved the use of digital technology as facilitated by a global program (Making All Voices Count), the case also reflects on when and how digital technology worked (in this case, did not work) to support the work of an organization.
As I attend my 3rd Open Government Partnership (OGP) Global Summit in Tblisi, Georgia, I am hoping to see progress in this network in breaking what I refer to as "open government myths."
Let me share ten of my most favorite:
“What can we do amidst these concerted efforts to strike down accountability? The people in the roundtable ask. What can we do against the overwhelming arrogance of power?
“The suggestion, coming from Government Watch — an action-research organization embedded in various civic groups all over the Philippines — is to revive the power of social movements. Or more specifically: revive the movement-building approach, especially in light of a society that feels more divided and fragmented than ever.”
On August 17, Government Watch (G-Watch) organized and facilitated a forum-workshop aimed to discuss and reflect on the key lessons learned, evidence and gains on adaptive learning, strategic citizen action and use of digital technologies generated through Making All Voices Count (MAVC) support in the Philippines and other related initiatives. Around 40 MAVC grantees, key G-Watch leaders all over the country and other relevant partners of G-Watch in governance reform attended to reflect on their initiatives.
Have we come to a point when even those who were once reform elements in the "truncated procedural democracy" have become integrated (accustomed, immersed, assimilated) in the system over time that they behave predictably in harmony with the system even when the system is already showing its decay, malfunctioning and total ineptitude?
The Philippines has a long history of state–society engagement to introduce reforms in government and politics. Forces from civil society and social movements have interfaced with reform-oriented leaders in government on a range of social accountability initiatives – to make governance more responsive, to introduce policy reforms, and to make government more accountable.
On November 18 at 12:00 noon, Ferdinand Marcos, the late dictator who ruled the Philippines with impunity for 14 years was buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani. It was a discreet burial kept hidden from the public until it was done. Protest actions took place all over Metro Manila culminating in a protest action at the People Power Monument in EDSA until the wee hours of the following day. Until now, social media are filled with memes and posts protesting the burial, 'educating' the public about the horrors of Martial Law and criticizing the Marcoses and Duterte for the burial that came like a "thief in the night."
This case study summary looks into the advocacy campaign of the Disaster Risk Reduction Network Philippines (DRRNetPhils), which was directed at the passage, implementation and review of the 2010 Disaster Risk Reduction Management (DRRM) Act.
The case study focuses on the organizing efforts of two national agrarian reform networks, the Rural Poor Institute for Land and Human Rights Services (known as RIGHTS Network) and the Movement for Agrarian Reform and Social Justice (Katarungan), and their campaign with local farmers’ organizations on the Bondoc Peninsula.
The case study looks at the work of Damayan ng Maralitang Pilipinong Api (DAMPA, Solidarity of Oppressed Poor Filipinos), a network of more than 90,000 poor urban households, which works to provide “viable solutions to basic poverty problems endemic to the urban poor” (DAMPA 2004).