As was to be expected this week?s announcement by the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria that they will be withholding $9 million in grants to Botswana has created a frenzy of criticism (most of it unwarranted) directed at Government in general and NACA in particular.
Most of the criticism is done out of context, paying very little regard to both facts and circumstances leading to that decision.
A careful evaluation of the frenzy brings one to the conclusion that the detractors do not have a sufficient background of how the Global Fund operates.
That the Global Fund will not be releasing $9 million worth of grants seems sufficiently big enough a crime to sentence the accused without trial.
What detractors do not want to admit is that the Sub-Recipients on whose behalf NACA receives the money from the Fund are hopelessly weak in as far as capacity to meet the Fund?s requirements is concerned.
The fact of the matter is that the Fund is withholding $9 million exactly because the implementing parties who are the Sub-Recipients (not NACA) have failed to meet a set of accounting requirements stipulated by the Geneva-based Fund for such money to be disbursed.
They have not met the deadline.
What people should be suggesting is that wouldn?t it be advisable for the Global Fund to have an international accounting firm as its local agent in Botswana.
Haranguing NACA, which everyone is bent on doing, will not help the situation.
Such a discourse has the potential to be counterproductive in killing the international goodwill Botswana has so far enjoyed in fighting HIV/AIDS.
What is even more disheartening is that very little effort is expended by the critics to acquaint themselves with the rules and regulations governing the Global Fund before attacking NACA.
Little effort is also expended by the same critics to acquaint themselves with the short history of the Fund since it came into being a few years back.
The Botswana government has gone to extraordinary lengths to cultivate cordial relations with a plethora of international organization without whose assistance, it must be said, the fight against HIV/AIDS would have been much more difficult than it currently is.
Their continued goodwill is still more than welcome, and indeed we should mourn the loss of $9 million.
While this is not to exonerate NACA from the mistakes they could have made as the Principal Recipient of the grants, the way the debate of the fallout has been developing has all the potential to create a totally false frame of mind that NACA has been irresponsible.
That does not only discredit NACA which is, by the way, the very embodiment of Botswana?s highly acclaimed efforts against HIV/AIDS. It also discredits the country.
Botswana?s struggle against HIV/AIDS will require a lot of resources and capacity but the tones that are developing with the latest attacks on NACA are not doing anything to entrench a culture of restraint and national unity that will be paramount if we are to convince international governments and NGOs to continue coming to our rescue.
We should be careful as Batswana in general and the media in particular not to allow ourselves to be used by the Global Fund in their campaign to effectively rubbish efforts by national government in the fight against HIV/AIDS.
In Botswana, HIV/AIDS has not been a political or partisan issue.
The BDP tried it in the last actions and burnt their fingers.
The highly charged assault on NACA could bring that to an end.
We should also add that the Global Fund is not new to controversy.
Global Fund has in the past been found out to be playing fast and loose with facts, especially in South Africa where on several occasions they wrongfully accused the national government there of keeping the Fund?s money at the treasury and not passing it to the implementing recipients.
Those who know the tenets under which the Fund was initiated would remember that respect for sovereignty of national institutions was one of those.
It should stay like that.
We should fight to empower our implementing organizations, rather than make them subservient to the Global Fund.
As the name says, NACA is a coordinating agency. Many of the implementing agencies on whose behalf NACA receives the money are very structurally weak to be able to meet the stringent accounting procedures and deadlines set by the Global Fund.
That is a fact of life we have to face in Botswana.
It is very important that we admit this sad truth.
Instead of rubbishing NACA, a way has to be found to ensure that the implementing sub-sectors and community based organizations are strengthened and supported with the necessary skills, training and personnel to ensure that their passion and goodwill translates into them meeting the tight conditions they often have to meet before accessing international aid.
Compared to other countries who qualify for the grants under the Global Fund Botswana is doing much better in meeting the otherwise complex requirements by the Fund.
We should assist NACA rather than denigrate them.
