Civil Society: Enabling Dissent - joint oD/Carnegie event

"Jimreed said", if not interpreted as idealist is indeed awakening and very right!

This must have come and gone. That is, it did not have announcements on the scale of 'civil liberties'!

Now that one sees it and still can comment, perhaps publication of the deliberations will be out sometime now or in the future. In any case, thinking of the central questions - What are the roles of civil society associations in enabling dissent? Where are the key eras where dissent is marginalised? What factors enable or inhibit dissent? What practical steps should be taken to support spaces for dissenting voices?], it is clear that array of speakers is well matched.

Many will however be looking forward to see the following in the report to be out or in further articles likely to promote one or the other aspects herein connected: (a) civil society and the associations thereupon at (i) UK level, (ii) at global level; (b) the frameworks or mechanisms by which their realities hence implications are interpreted at both levels; (c) characters of current "risk estimates or scenario constructions"; (d) chances that national level[s] can draw from or be informed by global level and vice-versa; etc. 

Series of questions emerge either remotely or immediately connected with those primary to ones already defined for the purpose: could be many personal to my comment but limited to following: What, why and where dissenting voices? How is democracy interpreted in relation? Are there historical and cultural elements in the patterns? How do dissenting voices aligned with definitions of freedoms and civil liberties? Where and how is it possible to determine excesses or are there or should there be limits to freedoms or civil liberties? Who are to decide that - the problematic 'bumerang' of politics hence governace patterns, in which civil societies, especially at level of states in normal circumstances are "makers of governors": the executive and legislatures]? 

The good thing is that the quest for knowledge could be rather unlimited for man. While that is good, using the knowledge, but limiting the scope of problems, definitions and use of new and old methods continuously task applications to ideal and real situations. For most observers it is enough with "Jimreed said". But the truth is mankind's problems are complex and multiple and must be managed - not-to-run-away-from! Really, because of the century and era we are currently living in, the facts of "diminishing spaces for public deliberations" do speak well - also in the negative] for themselves. On such facts are built the key concerns expressed for marginalisation of dissent voices and associations at state and global levels. At the same time, media behaviours, notions of self-expression on parts of our different civil societies, have become more conscious of threats to life and civil liberties, but relatively cautious of the plusses and minusses of anti-terror legislations everywhere. It is indeed the task of balance understanding, trust-building and true or committed search for how to 'sustain' human progress.

Understanding peace contextually doesn't have to the an issue of proportions, but now that we blindly created a world that we must face and not run away - for we have yet no where to run to], proportions come in for keeping the peace! In a world of the present time, active civil societies are a blessing rather than a curse! Diminishing returns have set into our economy and development, environmental/climate realities are down on all: WHAT MORE ARE WE WAITING TO LEARN FROM: poor knowledge, in-equalities and insurgent groups? 

On issue of the civil society at an individual country level, if Iam allowed or tolerated, the Northen Nigeria uprisings could be an one. There have been many such. But two are indeed relatively troubling, though they need not mean hating our brothers because of their religious faith. In this case my own complaint after reading through as many writings as could be found on the recent dilemma, is the complete omission to tell the world that the dimension of this new uprising was also a serious one of challenge for the country around mid 1980s. Then it came under the name "MAITATSINE". Dossiers are obviously available in the security archieves - the source of a lesson to have been able to guide and help timely containment: an act which could have reduced the lives lost. Now a hard "litmus" test for the quiet nice president! Anti-terror legislations, in which national security organisation, needs to be better groomed, morally responsible, but quick with surveillance works and prevention would be a thing that the global civil societies could do much to articulate and probably in that way help advance good governance in small and high-level state machineries. Intervenning with a distant theme of the kind, which belongs not directly to this fine paper, is because many might doubt that with dossiers available on above named, security hadn't the faintest inkling of what was about to unfold until it unfolded with loss of lives. I hope one is not killed or harrassed dashing in few words of wisdom] and not hunt!