|
Open Forum
New
Delhi, 22 July 2016
Future Of Panchayati Raj
ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY VITAL
By Dr.S.Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)
A question mark hangs over the
future of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRI) following a massive cut in the
budget. Wherein, a former Minister for Panchayati Raj has even expressed an
apprehension that the Ministry might face closure.
Undeniably, rapid expansion in
various developmental activities requiring big budget, large-scale planning and
extensive operation poses a threat to the prospects of small, grassroots
institutions.
Thanks to globalization, of which
technological advancement is a major part, having touched life in every nook
and corner of the country necessitating several adjustments in social-economic
life in the countryside voluntarily and involuntarily.
Pertinently, critics are concerned
with the cancellation of some schemes and budget cuts and view these as
indicators of declining importance of PRIs. Shockingly, the size of the budget
for PRIs declined from Rs.7,000 crore to Rs 96 crore last year and two key
programmes – The Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF), and Rajiv Gandhi Panchayat
Sashaktikaran Abhiyan (RGPSA) were dropped.
However, a closer look reveals that
a fresh thinking on utilizing the well-established PRIs is needed today to
prepare people and institutions at grassroots to take maximum possible
advantages from the global market.
Notably, the Government is quite
aware of this. Addressing Gram Sabhas throughout the nation on Panchayati Raj
Day (24th April), Prime Minister Modi exhorted panchayat
representatives to “initiate transformative changes in villages and bring a
positive difference in society during their terms”.
Interestingly, he stressed on reform
of local governance through panchayats themselves and through Gram Sabhas. Though
institutional changes at the State and Central levels were not considered while
fiscal transfer system does not show much confidence in panchayats.
Besides, international organizations
like the World Bank encourage economic liberalization to go along with
political decentralization. True, this might
involve a complex relationship in actual functioning but it is worthwhile
exploring the possibilities and avenues of partnership between the two.
Remember, the Ministry of Panchayati
Raj was created as a separate Ministry in the first UPA Government in 2004 with
the objective of promoting decentralized and participatory local
self-government. Its mission was set as empowerment, enablement, and accountability
of PRIs to ensure inclusive development with social justice and efficient
delivery of services.
However, in 2014 the NDA Government
clubbed together Rural Development, Panchayati Raj and Drinking Water and
Sanitation. Today, there are nearly two and a half lakh PRIs at village, block,
and district levels in India
and nearly 30 lakh elected representatives.
Truly, an ideal democratic set up
has taken roots in India and
to some degree in some other SAARC countries also – Bangladesh,
Nepal, and Pakistan.
Indeed, the history of panchayats
has never been smooth. Whereby, it has its ups and downs ever since systematic
local administrative organizations were constituted in the late 19th
century by the British Government.
Soon after Independence in the 1950s, the three-tier
Panchayati Raj was introduced after extensive in-depth studies. Though it did
not deliver expected results thanks to political and other causes, massive data
created in the 1960s can still provide guidance in our path towards devolution
of powers and decentralization of administration.
Outwardly, it might seem that
globalization and decentralization are diametrically opposite concepts and
cannot go together. Far from that. Decentralization
of governance is an indispensable aid for liberalization.
Importantly, the underlying concept
of Panchayati Raj is utilization of local and indigenous knowledge, rural
people, popular experience, and open public discussions in decision-making, and
transparency in administration of development and welfare schemes.
Economic reforms definitely need to
access, assess and act upon popular opinions and reactions at the grassroots to
be successful. Moreover, to think of joining global marketing system as
something disconnected with local economy and administration betrays ignorance
of economics as well as politics.
Unquestionably, local economy is
part and parcel of the larger economy --- national and global --- particularly,
in market economy as it determines and is determined by policies that define
macro economy.
No doubt, national economic
decision-making is centralized and predominantly elite-determined. The
decisions are technocratic rather than populist and mostly inaccessible and
beyond the comprehension of common people.
In such a scenario, our responsibility
is to somehow incorporate and ensure local participation in elite decisions.
People cannot be mere receivers of even reforms. And it is here; the well oiled
PRIs are of immense use and can play a substantial role.
There is no gainsaying, strong local
democracy and rapid economic and social development march together. Imagine for
a moment that macro-level decisions are imposed by centralized institutions
directly without intermediaries.
This will lead to suspicions and
disorder at the grassroots. To face
alien intrusion (in the sense of new ideas and strategies) through global
economy, institutions of decentralized
administrative system conducted with people’s participation is needed in both
tracks of communication to deliver global message in a form understandable by
the people.
And to ascertain and transmit local
response to that message. This will
help easy transfer to the new economic order without strain.
Significantly, democracies need the
rhetoric of local empowerment and inclusive political institutions more today
to carry out the decisions globally made and nationally approved and locally
implemented.
We can no longer remain satisfied with
plain economic redistribution and poverty alleviation. The new mantra is
empowerment and enablement. The stress must
be on rights and not relief.
Further, decentralization alone is
capable of protecting the poor and the weak and safeguarding the interests of
local area and people. Additionally, several local issues that have to be
sorted out while fitting macro and micro economy together, can best be handled
by local institutions.
Panchayat members are certainly much
closer to people than Parliament MPs physically if not by status. To fulfil
their roles and responsibilities, PRIs constituted within the existing
political and social system, have to adapt to changes and assume a new role.
Appropriately, it is useful to refer
to the concept of “subsidiarity” in the European Law which is based on the
concept that “needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest
to them”.
Its organizing principle is that
matters have to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized
competent authority.
True, the term “subsidiarity” might
not be familiar in India,
but its implications are not foreign to Indian Administration well versed in
local government institutions.
Consequently, India’s
interest in Panchayati Raj is not any strange idea. In many countries with diverse economy such
as Argentina, Chile, China,
Poland, and South Africa
autonomy of local units in decision-making is said to have provided a strong
viable foundation for economic reforms.
In China, the Town and Village
Enterprises (TVEs) were granted wide powers in matters relating to resource
mobilization, implementation of reforms etc. South Africa has adopted
comprehensive devolution of powers to the third tier.
Therefore, it is time to act on the
advice of the Prime Minister. One of the
immediate tasks of the State governments is to strengthen and reinvigorate PRIs
so that they will promote transparent, participatory, and accountable system of
governance in the country. ----- INFA
(Copyright, India
News and Feature Alliance)
|
Archives 
