[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: text of Article on Local Govt.
Thanks Prem for pointing us to this article. This is great material.
-Charu
Nagarpalikas: Devolution in letter, not spirit
By K DHARMARAJAN
It was on June 1, 1993 that the Constitution (74th
Amendment)
Act, 1992 commonly known as the Nagarpalika Act, came
into
force --when Constitutional recognition was given to
municipalities
as democratic units of urban self-governance.
Why was it considered necessary? Over the years the state
governments had made most of the municipal bodies, weak
and
ineffective. Elections were not being held regularly.
Supersession
for long periods of time had become the rule rather than
the
exception. For example, the Madras (now Chennai)
Corporations
had not seen an elected body for nearly a quarter of a
century
from 1972. Devolution of powers and functions to these
bodies
was totally inadequate and they enjoyed very little
financial
autonomy. The Nagarpalika Act sought to rectify this
situation and
to ``vest power in the only place where power rightfully
belongs in
a democracy, that is in the hands of people'', as the
then Prime
Minister had put it.
The state governments amended their municipal laws to
fall in line
with the 74th amendment, by providing for:
* regular elections,
* protection from indiscriminate supersession,
* reservation of seats for women and for Scheduled
Castes.
Nearly 60,000 elected representatives, 20,000 of them
women have
since come into the urban political system. This indeed
is an
achievement to feel proud of. But this only a first step.
However, when we look at whether powers and functions
have
been truly delegated to these urban local bodies, barring
a few
exceptions one can say that it has been little more than
a cosmetic
exercise. The division of powers between the Centre and
states
are clearly defined by the three lists in the seventh
Schedule. But in
the case of the 74th Amendment the 12th Schedule only
lists the
functions which could be delegated to municipal
government
leaving the discretion to the state governments to
incorporate these
in the state legislation.
It was hoped that each state government would exercise
its mind
on this subject and perhaps assign a different set of
functions to the
different categories of municipal bodies keeping in mind
their
requirements, financial status and other factors.
Unfortunately this did not happen. Thus one main
objective of the
Act namely a clear demarcation of functions and
responsibilities
taking into consideration the capabilities and resources
of these
bodies at different levels and the needs of the people
has not been
met. Hence the country has not reaped the full advantages
of such
a momentous move which would have changed the paradigm of
development to one centred on people's participation thus
bringing
us closer to becoming a more humane, caring society.
If we look at the issue of municipal finances, the new
state laws
provide for the constitution of state finance
commissions.
Some states have even passed orders in regard to sharing
of taxes
on the basis of the recommendations of these commissions.
In
Tamil Nadu, for example, it has been decided that 8 per
cent of the
total tax revenues (except for entertainment tax) would
be shared
with the local bodies. Of this 45 per cent would be given
to urban
local bodies. A clear system of inter se allocation
between the
municipal bodies has also been decided upon.
But a point of concern is that in some states even after
accepting
the recommendations of the Finance Commission the Finance
Department has not released funds to local bodies.
Another lacuna
has been that the state finance commissions have not gone
into the
functional domains, the standards or norms required for
delivery of
services, and to estimate revenue gaps.
When we look at the planning issue one finds that most
states have
put this on the back burner. Laws have not been amended
to
provide for district and metropolitan planning committees
involving
the elected representatives as required under the
Nagarpalika Act.
This is not surprising since at present it is either a
district collector
or a minister who chairs these committees and they would
prefer
the present system to continue. But what is disappointing
is that the
elected members of the local urban bodies have not taken
up this
matter with their respective states vigorously.
But the issue that causes the greatest concern is that no
action has
taken place to bring citizen participation into the
planning and
implementation of programmes at the ward or local levels.
It was
expected that such participation in the larger
municipalities would
be done through the mechanism of ward committees for
which a
provision has been made in the Nagarpalika Act. It is
unfortunate
that these ward committees have not been constituted
properly nor
have they been energised.
Will true decentralisation take place? Will the palika
allow the
people to participate in the activities of their nagar?
Sharing power is difficult. Whenever one fights for
devolution it is
only devolution up to ``my'' level. State governments
feel that they
know best and that the Central government should delegate
all
powers to the state level since they understand the needs
of their
citizens. But when you talk of devolution to local
governments the
state governments feel that elected representatives at
the local
level would neither have the capability nor
responsibility to plan and
implement programmes properly. And at the municipal level
the
councillors feel that involving citizens is only an
unnecessary
burden. After all, are they not the elected
representatives of the
people in the ward and would they not know the needs of
the
people they represent!
How then can one bring about change? It has to be like a
struggle
for freedom. Unless one fights for one's rights, unless
citizens
come together to constantly and consistently put pressure
for
changes in the system, power will not be shared and
governments
will not come closer to citizens.
Municipal councillors have to fight with the state
legislatures and
their governments for clearer devolution of
responsibilities and
greater financial autonomy. Of course they have to set
their own
house in order and improve both in terms of
administrative
efficiency and better financial management.
Bureaucrats have to stop seeing themselves as ``officers
of
government'' and re-vision themselves as servants of the
people.
They also need to be proactive in helping managers and
politicians
at the municipal level to equip themselves adequately to
responsibly
exercise the financial and political autonomy that the
amendment
seeks to vest in them.
At the citizen's level a very active movement of forming
citizen's
groups and taking up issues with municipal councillors
and
governments is the only way that one can make government
at the
city level work. We have voted our councillor in. There
is no
reason why each one of us cannot put pressure on him to
ensure
that our basic needs are met. And if the councillor feels
that he
does not have adequate powers to function and deal with
the
problems of his people there is no reason why he in turn
cannot put
pressure on the MLA and his Municipality President to get
the
power he needs.
The pain we feel at the ground level has to travel up.
|Metropolis| |India| |World| |Stocks| |Business|
|Sport| |Editorial|
For comments and feedback send Email
© Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. 1997. Reproduction in whole
or in part without written permission is
prohibited. To access reprinting rights, please
contact Times Syndication Service.