The Hindu : National : Building on dreams

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Jan 02, 2005

National

National

Building on dreams

The Left Democratic Front Government in Kerala enlarged the scope of grama sabhas to mean a fourth tier of government.

PANCHAYATI RAJ institutions in India have generally implemented government programmes imposed from above. In most States, the local bodies were characterised by excessive control by the bureaucracy, lack of financial resources, corruption, delay in the conduct of elections, poor representation of weaker sections including women. At best they had a consultative role in local-level planning.

The only exceptions, perhaps, were West Bengal, where, owing to the Left's initiatives, panchayats became instruments of rural development as well as social change through land reforms; and Karnataka, where in 1983 a Janata Party Government launched a experiment in decentralisation, which failed to realise its potential.

However, in 1996, riding a wave of enthusiasm generated by a focussed, campaign-mode planning exercise involving thousands, the then Left Democratic Front (LDF) Government in the State committed itself to implementing what a predecessor administration led by the Congress (I) had half-heartedly introduced — State laws to comply with the 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendments of 1993 for establishing and institutionalising a revitalised third tier of government in the State.

Till then, despite the Gandhian ideal of village self-government being embodied as an aspiration in the Constitution, Kerala, like a majority of other States, had failed to take successful steps towards decentralisation of powers. (A brief attempt by an earlier LDF Government to establish district councils in 1989 was an exception, but its provisions were sabotaged by the UDF that won office immediately afterwards.)

The coalition-ruled State had failed even to conduct local elections in time, even though it was the first State to implement successful land reforms and achieve widespread literacy, health status and a higher quality of life even at low levels of economic development. Such attainments were in a way also a result of the mobilisation of people on a large scale, of remarkable volunteer spirit and political commitment, in addition to progressive laws that were introduced mostly at the initiative of the Left movement.

Therefore, when the LDF Government launched yet another `people's campaign' in August 1996, this time for `democratic decentralisation,' its evolution was considered the real test of the idea venerated in the Constitution and a lesson for other States.

By that time, though, the Congress (I)-led Government had already passed the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, to conform to the Constitutional amendments. It had also issued an order transferring the prescribed institutions, schemes, buildings and functions to the Local Self-Government Institutions (LSGIs). Yet it failed to provide the local bodies with the prerequisites for "successful decentralisation."

The LSGIs continued to be fund-starved and fully dependent on manna from the State Government. They had more responsibilities but no staff. They depended fully on the State bureaucracy over which they had little control. Though the first group of elected representatives under the new three-tier village-block-district panchayat system came to power in 1995, they were inadequately trained to run the new Constitutionally mandated and (rudimentarily) decentralised system "to prepare plans for economic development and social justice and for the implementation of development schemes." The panchayats also lacked a local information base and capacity-building programmes.

This was the opportunity that the CPI (M)-led LDF Government (1996-2001) seized, seeking to remedy the defects by focussing on substantial further devolution of powers, functions and funds.

It set apart 35 to 40 per cent of the Plan funds for exclusive use by the new, third tier of government in the State (which included the panchayats, municipalities and corporations, the block panchayats and the district panchayats). For the first time in India, LSGIs in a State thus got funds of their own to undertake development activities prioritised directly by the people of a locality.

It launched the `People's Planning Campaign', the biggest non-formal education exercise ever undertaken in the country. The energies of thousands of activists, volunteers and officials were harnessed in capacity building — as trainers, resource persons and technical experts. Thousands of ordinary people were mobilised for participatory and scientific collection of information regarding material and human resources and development problems in each locality and for drawing up development plans for every panchayat in the State.

It transferred a number of offices, institutions and personnel to the control of the local bodies. The president of the local body (municipal chairman or mayor in municipalities and corporations) was declared the executive authority with full administrative control, including powers of disciplinary action over the staff.

Most importantly, the LDF Government enlarged the scope of grama and ward sabhas envisaged in the Constitution to mean not just "a body of persons" for namesake democracy but, uniquely in India, a fourth tier of government, in which "all persons whose names are included in the electoral rolls" were members. The grama and ward sabhas were to be the essence of the decentralisation experiment in the State. They were legally required to be convened every three months, to have a specified quorum, and, to be a forum for direct democracy, a sort of ward/village-level Parliament, with "the right to know," discuss and direct almost every activity in a village.

Nearly a dozen powerful legal support structures were also included in the Act and the rules, to ensure genuine empowerment of the people. With all the provisions sanctified by Constitutionally mandated laws, for a brief period, it seemed, a dream had come true in at least one State in India.

— R.K.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National