By Amar Yumnam
We all understand that decentralization is now being advocated as the panacea for developmental ills around the globe. But the manner in which the recent Panchayat elections in Manipur were canvassed and the way people participated in those elections throw up a lot of questions to be discussed.
United Nations: Before I proceed further on this I would like to quote from an important document of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs because of the relevance of the points and counterpoints raised. Let me quote extensively from the document for the convenience of the readers of this column. “It is believed that under peacetime conditions, decentralized governance, carefully planned, effectively implemented and appropriately managed, can lead to significant improvement in the welfare of people at the local level, the cumulative effect of which can lead to enhanced human development. As a key to human development, friendly decentralized governance is to ensure that the voices and concerns of the poor, especially women, help guide its design, implementation and monitoring. For development and governance to be fully responsive and representational, people and institutions must be empowered at every level of society – national, provincial, district, city, town and village. Decentralized governance entails the empowering of subnational levels of society to ensure that local people participate in, and benefit from, their own governance institutions and development services. Institutions of decentralization, local governance and, by extension, urban/rural development, must bring policy formulation, service delivery and resource management within the purview of the people. These institutions should enable people, especially the poor and the marginalized, to exercise their choices for human development. The direct linkage between decentralized governance and development concerns empowerment of local populations to plan, implement, manage their development process taking into account their local needs and capacities
In post-conflict situations where central governments are usually relatively weak and service provision to the citizenry minimal, decentralized networks of local institutions, individuals, and humanitarian operations, can offer opportunities to re- establish Government services, mobilize communities, improve democratic processes and demonstrate the responsiveness of public institutions. In such cases the beginnings of horizontal decentralization, through community empowerment, promotion of civil society organizations such as community based organization for self help can be initiated to form a relatively solid base for implementing vertical decentralization (transfer of powers, functions, responsibilities and resources from Central Government to local Governments).
“However, we need to bear in mind that sometimes, especially in fragmented societies, there can be dangers in putting undue emphasis on decentralized governance. Here attention needs to be paid to critical questions such as the following: (i) How can multi-ethnic societies achieve development in situations where conflict causes insecurity and threatens the existence of States? (ii) Is decentralized governance a facilitator or an inhibitor of peace and development in such situations? (iii) Which forms (or combinations of forms) of decentralization (territorial decentralization, political decentralization, deconcentration etc) are suitable in such situations? (iv) Is decentralization a panacea for problems related to peace and development?
“Political decentralization puts in place local governments at sub-national national level allowing for relatively extensive decision-making, policy-making and even some legislative authority over a specific territory and its population. Such local governments thus enjoy a degree of political, administrative and fiscal autonomy. Decentralization takes various forms including not only federalism but also other organizational structures such as autonomous regions, districts or municipalities and communes. If all central governments and all societies were responsible, democratic and very mindful of the human rights, the security and survival of minorities, one would reasonably argue that arrangements such as the above are not necessary for peace. That peace, security and protection of minorities is always guaranteed under what ever arrangements. Unfortunately experience around the world is telling a different story.”
These are observations fit for detailed scrutiny in the context of Manipur. Well I would leave this for another day. I would, however, like to specifically confine to the characteristic features of the recent panchayat elections.
Our Failure: The singular failure of Manipur is the inability to elect capable leaders. The State has got wonderful individuals in different arenas of life, but when it comes to electing representatives for the Assembly or the Parliament, we seem to be suffering from collective failures – a la micro-wise and macro-foolish. Whereas we are much more competitive at individual levels than the citizens of sister State of Meghalaya, they have utterly beaten us when it comes to governance and electing representatives.
The recent Panchayat elections were nothing more than institutionalization of corruption at the lowest levels. Otherwise, one fails to understand the involvement of money at the level of even members of gram panchayats. In other words, political corruption has been decentralized at the societal level. The other important quality of democracy which has been compromised by the recent Panchayat elections is that of fostering political competition. We have completely missed out on the positive aspects of fostering political competition. We have, on the other hand, fostered all the negative aspects of political jugglery; what we have now is all a culture of rent-seeking.
Well, we ponder over ourselves now or tomorrow may be too late.
The Sangai Express
We all understand that decentralization is now being advocated as the panacea for developmental ills around the globe. But the manner in which the recent Panchayat elections in Manipur were canvassed and the way people participated in those elections throw up a lot of questions to be discussed.
United Nations: Before I proceed further on this I would like to quote from an important document of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs because of the relevance of the points and counterpoints raised. Let me quote extensively from the document for the convenience of the readers of this column. “It is believed that under peacetime conditions, decentralized governance, carefully planned, effectively implemented and appropriately managed, can lead to significant improvement in the welfare of people at the local level, the cumulative effect of which can lead to enhanced human development. As a key to human development, friendly decentralized governance is to ensure that the voices and concerns of the poor, especially women, help guide its design, implementation and monitoring. For development and governance to be fully responsive and representational, people and institutions must be empowered at every level of society – national, provincial, district, city, town and village. Decentralized governance entails the empowering of subnational levels of society to ensure that local people participate in, and benefit from, their own governance institutions and development services. Institutions of decentralization, local governance and, by extension, urban/rural development, must bring policy formulation, service delivery and resource management within the purview of the people. These institutions should enable people, especially the poor and the marginalized, to exercise their choices for human development. The direct linkage between decentralized governance and development concerns empowerment of local populations to plan, implement, manage their development process taking into account their local needs and capacities
In post-conflict situations where central governments are usually relatively weak and service provision to the citizenry minimal, decentralized networks of local institutions, individuals, and humanitarian operations, can offer opportunities to re- establish Government services, mobilize communities, improve democratic processes and demonstrate the responsiveness of public institutions. In such cases the beginnings of horizontal decentralization, through community empowerment, promotion of civil society organizations such as community based organization for self help can be initiated to form a relatively solid base for implementing vertical decentralization (transfer of powers, functions, responsibilities and resources from Central Government to local Governments).
“However, we need to bear in mind that sometimes, especially in fragmented societies, there can be dangers in putting undue emphasis on decentralized governance. Here attention needs to be paid to critical questions such as the following: (i) How can multi-ethnic societies achieve development in situations where conflict causes insecurity and threatens the existence of States? (ii) Is decentralized governance a facilitator or an inhibitor of peace and development in such situations? (iii) Which forms (or combinations of forms) of decentralization (territorial decentralization, political decentralization, deconcentration etc) are suitable in such situations? (iv) Is decentralization a panacea for problems related to peace and development?
“Political decentralization puts in place local governments at sub-national national level allowing for relatively extensive decision-making, policy-making and even some legislative authority over a specific territory and its population. Such local governments thus enjoy a degree of political, administrative and fiscal autonomy. Decentralization takes various forms including not only federalism but also other organizational structures such as autonomous regions, districts or municipalities and communes. If all central governments and all societies were responsible, democratic and very mindful of the human rights, the security and survival of minorities, one would reasonably argue that arrangements such as the above are not necessary for peace. That peace, security and protection of minorities is always guaranteed under what ever arrangements. Unfortunately experience around the world is telling a different story.”
These are observations fit for detailed scrutiny in the context of Manipur. Well I would leave this for another day. I would, however, like to specifically confine to the characteristic features of the recent panchayat elections.
Our Failure: The singular failure of Manipur is the inability to elect capable leaders. The State has got wonderful individuals in different arenas of life, but when it comes to electing representatives for the Assembly or the Parliament, we seem to be suffering from collective failures – a la micro-wise and macro-foolish. Whereas we are much more competitive at individual levels than the citizens of sister State of Meghalaya, they have utterly beaten us when it comes to governance and electing representatives.
The recent Panchayat elections were nothing more than institutionalization of corruption at the lowest levels. Otherwise, one fails to understand the involvement of money at the level of even members of gram panchayats. In other words, political corruption has been decentralized at the societal level. The other important quality of democracy which has been compromised by the recent Panchayat elections is that of fostering political competition. We have completely missed out on the positive aspects of fostering political competition. We have, on the other hand, fostered all the negative aspects of political jugglery; what we have now is all a culture of rent-seeking.
Well, we ponder over ourselves now or tomorrow may be too late.
The Sangai Express
