Improving local governance through inclusion and dialogue in Iraq

From the ancient Mesopotamian assemblies, through consultative practices during the Islamic period to the fostering of public debate and deliberation during British colonialism and Hashemite monarchy, democratic practices have a long history in Iraq. But as a consequence of the more recent decades of authoritarian and centralized rule, the distinct responsibilities of citizens and the state in a democracy cannot be taken for granted.

In Iraq, the concept of the state working for and delivering for its people is far from a reality, and with the US invasion 2003 many state institutions were completely dismantled and a new system of government was imposed.

As if decades of oppression and terror were not enough, a vicious civil war followed the US-led invasion during which ethnic and religious identities were put at the forefront and instrumentalized, eventually resulting in the takeover of large parts of the country by ISIS – further eroding the social fabric.

Following the defeat of ISIS there was growing opposition to sectarian politics and a sense that people needed to unite across sectarian and religious divides. Coupled with anger over corruption, lack of services and lack of jobs it sparked a protest movement that culminated in 2019 with large-scale demonstrations in many of Iraq’s provinces. The protesters were met with a violent crackdown and targeted by armed groups affiliated with the state. Some 600 protesters were killed and many arrested. Local government offices were burnt to the ground by angry mobs in several provinces.

It is fair to say that trust was low between the state and its people, with few government officials willing (or daring) to let people or civil society into its offices.

Decentralization meant that decision-making moved closer to the people, and decision-makers had to be in contact with their communities to understand their needs and priorities. This relationship did not exist.

Bridging the gap between the state and the people

FBA had been operating in Iraq for about a year, focusing on dialogue and youth, peace and security, when we launched a project for inclusive governance in 2021. The protest movement had made it clear that inclusive governance and constructive channels for communication between state institutions and the people were needed not just in the north, where ISIS had controlled most territory and sectarianism had ravaged communities, but in all of Iraq.

Bridging this divide and improving relations between the community and the state was the main aim of the FBA project Inclusive and Transparent Local Governance. Civil society was identified as a key actor to help connect people with decision makers. But starting out from an unclear understanding of respective roles, as well as low trust, made relationship building a central imperative to integrate into the project structure. A sense of urgency following the protest movement helped create impetus for the project, with both civil society and government realizing that they need to figure out how to work together in order to stabilize the country.

A decentralization reform had been underway since Iraq’s new constitution was adopted in 2005, with pertaining legislation in 2008, but was making slow progress. Some said it had almost come to a halt or even described it as a “one step forward, two steps back”- kind of process. Much of the work around the decentralization reform had focused on legislation and sorting out the technical authorities of local governments, and limited capacity building of government officials. Not much attention was paid to the behavioral or relationship aspects of this new governance system.

Decentralization meant that decision-making moved closer to the people, and decision-makers had to be in contact with their communities to understand their needs and priorities. This relationship did not exist.

FBA worked in partnership with a local organization, Irfad, who for years had provided technical assistance to local governments in Diwaniya and Muthanna. Their knowledge and relationships were crucial for ensuring local ownership. Not only did they know who to invite from local government and civil society, but also how to bring them together and facilitate a process of joint analysis and co-creation.

Over a period of approximately 18 months, FBA and Irfad together facilitated a platform for dialogue and analysis among the 25 participants to jointly identify solutions to strengthen participation in local decision-making. By simultaneously testing pilot ideas and conducting joint activities, the participants were learning by doing, identifying assumptions and uncovering dynamics of government and society that they could not have anticipated. Due to the complex nature of the challenge of local participation, an adaptive approach was necessary to gradually build our shared understanding of the way forward.

the fact that local government and civil society actors now not only are willing to meet through different dialogue platforms – but convene these platforms themselves, is a result well beyond what we had anticipated.

From animosity to trust

Two years into the project, the participants felt confident enough to establish their own Community Participation Teams under the umbrella of the local government’s Provincial Planning and Development Council. This was a milestone in the project, as the 25 participants from civil society and local government began initiating and leading community participation initiatives on their own. Irfad and FBA continuously provided capacity building and mentoring, but the Community Participation Teams were now clearly at the forefront.

Another remarkable development was the increased interest and growing number of requests from both the local and federal government, to utilize the Community Participation Team to help government entities communicate with citizens in select locations or around specific issues. Local governments have since shared information about budgets and project plans with citizens and on several occasions adapted them according to information shared during the dialogues facilitated by the CPTs, something previously unheard of in these provinces.

Civil society organizations have increasingly been invited into government decision making and to sit on committees advising the government on everything from decentralization and local governance reform, identifying community priorities for project planning, to social security legislation and the prevention of violent extremism.

Given the high level of animosity and suspicion that characterized the relationships between the government and the people – the fact that local government and civil society actors now not only are willing to meet through different dialogue platforms – but convene these platforms themselves, is a result well beyond what we had anticipated.

But perhaps, given Iraq’s long tradition of democratic practices further back and the strong sense of individual and collective responsibility among people of contributing to building an inclusive society – we should not be surprised.

av Annika Folkesson, Frida Swidan