By
Randeep Wadehra
Governing India has become a
herculean task. There are ever increasing instances of bad governance from all
over India. This becomes clearer when attempts at implementing reforms and
people friendly policies are thwarted due to poor implementation systems and tools
at the grassroots level. In the urban areas, the state of governance is bad
enough but in the countryside the situation has become alarming. Many steps, both
legislative as well as executive, are required to rejuvenate the systems and
structures of governance. New systems and structures, along with updating of
the existing ones, may help cope with the aspirations of the 21st
century India. More importantly, it is important that – as in cricket – one
must never ignore the basics. Translated into the governance parlance this
would mean focusing on local bodies in towns and cities and, more importantly,
the Panchayati Raj Institutions in villages.
Even before India had become
independent panchayats were looked upon as ideal, and almost readymade,
institutions for grassroots governance. In 1882, the then Viceroy of India,
Lord Ripon modeled his local administrative units upon the panchayati system
that had become tattered during the Mughal rule. Mughals believed in highly
centralized form of administration and replaced the hoary institutions with
zamindari and kotwali systems. However, Ripon realized their importance and
potential for systematizing local governance, especially in the urban areas. To
ensure popular participation in the management of local affairs he put into
place an effective election process. No wonder he is considered the founding
father of urban local government. Although the rural areas remained largely
ignored – thanks to the continuation of the zamindari and ryotwari systems –
panchayats remained active, albeit in a limited way.
The Decentralization Commission
of 1907, while transferring more powers to the provinces did provide for some
improvements in local self-government. But these did not go very far and
essentially kept panchayats out of the overall architecture of governance. Even
when Indian political parties won local/provincial elections and formed
governments in such provinces as the Punjab and the United Provinces etc
panchayats remained peripheral to their administrative concerns. However, the
Congress ministries formed in various local bodies did help in setting off the process
of democratization of panchayati institutions. Gandhiji had great faith in the
efficacy of panchayats as means of administration at the village level. As a
votary of Panchayati Raj Mahatma Gandhi wanted them to play a far more
significant role at the social, administrative and political levels than what
had been envisaged until then.
After the Independence panchayats
began to get due attention. It was realized that these hoary institutions could
become effective tools for ushering in developmental processes at the
grassroots level. However, although the Balwant Rai Mehta Committee had
envisaged the “planning from below” concept as early as in 1957 it took the government quite a bit of time to
fashion necessary micro-level systems for making panchayats viable vehicles for
development. Before this happened, several other committees and working groups
were formed that looked into several aspects of micro level planning at the
block level and/or the reasons for failures of the Panchayati Raj Institutions.
However, the Constitutional Amendment
Act, 1992 facilitated revamping of the PRIs. The Act provides for: (a) a three
tier system of PRIs - Gram Panchayat at the village level, Janapad Panchayat at
the block level and Zila Panchayat at the district level, with sufficient
powers and functions contained in schedule XI of the Act; (ii) establishing of
State Election Commission to ensure free, fair and timely elections after the
expiry of every 5 years, and (iii) the creation of State Finance Commission
after every 5 years to recommend devolution of financial resources from the
state government to local bodies and also suggest measures for strengthening
their financial position.
As we all know, the rural local
government operates through Zila Panchayats (Parishads), Taluka Panchayats and
Village Panchayats and cover most, if not all, of the country. Strangely,
authorities have ignored the potential of these homegrown institutions as
effective facilitators, or rather structures, of self-governance. The Constitution visualizes
panchayats as institutions of self-governance. Yet, these find no significant
status in the federal structure of our polity; most of the financial powers and
authorities to be endowed on panchayats have been left to the discretion of
concerned state legislatures. Consequently, the powers and functions vested in
PRIs vary from state to state. Moreover, too much interference by the state
government restricts the PRIs’ scope for functioning independently. Often,
panchayats become vulnerable to the whims of local MLAs and MPs. There is a
need for insulating PRIs against such interferences. Another aspect that needs
to be looked into is prevention of constitutional provisions’ subversion. For
example, although the Constitutional Amendment Act, 1993 provides for
reservation of women in the PRIs with the intention to empower the rural women
things are not going according to plans. Although comprehensive surveys have
not been conducted it is clear from various media reports that, often, women do
not have independent say in the affairs of the PRIs they get elected to; their
men-folk rule from behind the scenes, turning the entire process of empowering
women into a farce.
It will be much better if PRIs
are integrated into the overall governmental structure while retaining their
democratic essence. Thence could start the process of institutional empowerment.
This may be done by allowing them to look after law and order, tax collection,
local development and various functions of municipal nature like sanitation, local
transport etc. It is also worth considering that certain quasi judicial
functions like settling of local disputes of civil nature, arbitration etc too
are given to the PRIs uniformly throughout the country. While empowering the
PRIs in this manner a system of checks and balances too would need to be put in
place in order to ensure that their extensive powers are used only for the
betterment of all in the village without violating any of our constitutional
acts and statutes.
Obviously, there is a need to
reform the PRIs. For this, the political-bureaucratic establishment will have
to genuinely include PRIs in the architecture of governance as indispensable
keystone and not as a superfluous adjunct.
Published in The Financial World dated 29 March 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment