BackManoj Rai | A constitutional contradiction
Why do the central and state govts deliberately undermine the constitutionally created panchayats?
Premium(Pradeep Gaur/Mint)
The collector of any district in India would be heading 100 to 150 committees related to various development initiatives in the area. Collectors often don’t get time to prepare for or preside over the meetings of these committees—imagine what happens to implementation then. On the other hand, the heads of district panchayats and municipalities in the districts complain about their exclusion from decisions pertaining to local development.
As per the 73rd and 74th amendments of the Constitution (enacted in 1993), elected representatives of panchayats and urban local bodies (ULBs) are responsible for promoting economic and social development in their areas. Collectors don’t have time to act and elected representatives don’t have the power to use their time for development. There are many examples of collectors taking action against elected panchayats. This is happening even 20 years after the constitutional creations of panchayats and municipalities in democratic India. Isn’t it a constitutional contradiction?
Why do the central and state governments, supposed to be the enablers and guardians of local government, deliberately undermine the constitutionally created panchayats and municipalities? Many departments and agencies of the central and state governments encroach upon the functional domain of local governments. Article 243 D of the Constitution, for example, has empowered district planning committees (DPCs) to prepare draft district development plans. These plans should be the basis for preparation of the state and national plans. But the Planning Commission and state governments (votaries of decentralization) finalize all plans ignoring the recommendations, if any, of the DPCs, supposed to be functioning in about 600 districts of the country.
Reflecting on the 20 year journey of constitutional local governance in India, one could say that panchayats and urban local bodies have enabled great positive shifts at local levels. The visible leadership roles of women and scheduled castes and scheduled tribes have brought about inclusive change in the local power structures and economic development. Institutional mechanisms to strengthen panchayats and urban bodies such as the constitution of state election commissions, state finance commissions, district planning committees, holding of elections, reservation. and so on have been largely addressed. But crucial issues such as devolution of power to local governments, capacity building of elected representatives, empowerment of gram sabhas, enabling internal resource mobilization, control over service delivery and social-accountability are still ambiguous in most states. It seems state governments are not genuinely committed to empower panchayats. The central government’s role in recent years has been indifferent and sometime against the spirit of the constitution. Unfortunately, central ministries and departments often view panchayats as mere offloading and implementing agencies.
How do central and state governments cleverly manipulate and undermine the constitutional spirit for strengthening local governance in India? The involvements of panchayats, for example, in various central and state schemes, programmes and processes are often cosmetic in nature. Why, for example, do the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) or Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) have separate departmental implementation committees such as VHSNC (village health sanitation and nutrition committees) and VEC (village education committee) in every village? These committees are accountable to NRHM and SSA—not to the panchayats. These committees openly undermine the panchayats. It is sad that even today state and governments have the final say on certifying who is below poverty line in a village or city. Panchayats and municipalities at best could be recommending bodies.
PESA (panchayats in tribal area) is supposed to be one of the most progressive acts to promote inclusive tribal governance and tribal development. The Forest Rights Act reinforced the implementation of PESA. But still tribals are at the mercy of forest officials. Forest, land and water departments exercise control over forest, land and water in tribal areas by deliberately ignoring the provisions of PESA. Various studies and reports talk about the lack of political will in strengthening panchayati raj in the country. But it seems that there is a hidden consensus among political parties to weaken local governance. With the ever-changing scenario of political bargaining and creation of more power centres at the central and state levels, the fate of panchayati raj has become unpredictable. Power dynamics within panchayats and between panchayats and members of legislative assemblies and members of Parliament are dangerously damaging the panchayat system. There is need to have some mutual accountability mechanism.
Government’s pilot projects on direct cash transfer are supposed to improve the situation of end beneficiaries, but this may change the whole dynamics of the panchayati raj system. Whatever be the result of cash transfers, it is certain that this initiative would promote centralization at the cost of a decentralized panchayat system. Panchayats should be given a central role in this initiative by arming them with powers to ask for accountability of structures engaged in cash transfers.
As Parliament gave birth to modern panchayats, one may presume that the ministry of panchayati raj would nurture panchayats in the country. In its initial years, the ministry did play such a role. But the activities and utterances of the ministry in the past 2-3 years have not been very supportive of panchayats. It seems the ministry is happy playing a passive role. How long would this go on? Democracy should not be compromised in Delhi and state capitals. Let its benefits reach common citizens to whom the panchayats and urban local bodies are most proximate and most accessible institutions of governance.
Manoj Rai is the director of New Delhi-based Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA) that works in the field of capacity building, knowledge building, participatory research, citizen-centric development and policy advocacy.
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
