Sep 6, 2003

IMITATING SPIDERS WON'T DO
PANCHAYATI RAJ INSTITUTIONS NEED MORE

New Delhi : Spiders are more intelligent than the human beings, said a scientist and Gulliver was surprised. Why ? Because human beings construct their building from the bottom to top while spiders build from the top and saves labour and material up to a great extent which otherwise would be necessary at the bottom, he was informed. It was a brilliant idea and we should not be surprised if we see our governments and planners trying to imitate the spider while working for the national building. They plan at the top and start working downwards to the level of Panchayats and Villages. This experiment has also yielded some fruits and saved much efforts and money which might go 'waste' at the bottom. But they also failed in many counts, especially due to want of ground works which supports a building. Nevertheless, the experiment is going on and the planners hope success after some time.

The people outside government have always been hopeless, however, with such type of national building exercise. Therefore, there is a longstanding demand that the national building work should start from the bottom, say from the villages and the Panchayats. The governments in the independent India did not agree at all to concede this demand up to 1992, when 73rd Constitutional Amendment Bill was finally passed in the Lok Sabha. After that, the Parliament also passed 74th Constitutional Amendment Bill next year. Both the constitutional amendments provided for more financial and administrative powers to the Panchayati Raj Institutions. It was made mandatory for the State governments and Centre ( in case of Union Territories) to devolve powers for 29 subjects to the grassroots under 11th Schedule of the Constitution of India. The aims and objects of such devolution of power was to build the nation from the bottom, but many doubts about its effectiveness prevailed in the government officials and the planners at the top.

Then the forces against Panchayati Raj tried their best to hamper the implementation of these Constitutional amendments under some or the other pretexts. Even elections to the Panchayati Raj institutions have been hampered for years in some states , and in most of them the governments failed to conduct periodic elections which is a basic democratic requirement under the law. However, devolution of power to such institutions has remained a distant dream in many respects.

It is a matter of great concern that even after more than a decade after the enactment of this constitutional provision only one state in the country has devolved all the 29 subjects to the Panchayati Raj Institutioins. Kerala has delegated only 26 subjects while Assam has devolved only 11. The rest of the States in the country lag far behind. In this backdrop there is a little scope for our Panchayats to work effectively, who elect over three million representatives including one million women and 500,000 Dalits and Adivasis. There are reports that even the elected representatives from the weaker sections of the society are kept under all sorts of threat including violence by the dominant sections or interests.

Apart from the faulty strategy of national building, several other causes hamper the implementation of the provisions under Panchayati Raj Act. One can take the present political and administrative power structures in different states. They do not want to lose their powers over the subjects that traditionally fall under their domain. There are politics involved in it, both at the levels of the state and the Centre. The political establishment at the Centre want to make the villagers believe that they are doing much more than the political establishments at the state level and vice versa. This attitude is more pronounced especially when the ruling establishments at the both levels are competitors in politics. They can be seen even working for cross purposes contrary to both the spirit and letter of the Panchayati Raj Act.

Here is an example. In 1999, the political establishment at the Centre decided to play more politics directly at the district level so that they can attract more votes. The logic given for this was that the development at the grassroots level cannot be left at the hands of the states because they are not allotting more funds due to financial crunch. Therefore, the Centre would give funds directly to the districts and not through the states as was in practice. Thus, the Centre vested the District Rural Development Agency (DRDAs) with control over development activities at the district level. It was in clear violation of the Panchayati Raj Act which envisaged integration of the functions of the DRDAs with the Zila Parishads. The Centre was not satisfied with this measure, and it came forward with another plan through the Ministry of Rural Development and placed the elected body , namely Zila Parishad under a nominated body headed by Members of Parliament. This nominated body was christened as District Vigilance and Monitoring Committees.

It was a clear cut interference in state affairs because many of the subjects comes either in the state list or concurrent list of the Constitution of India. Why should the Centre meddle with the state subjects ! In the Era of competitive populism, especially with the rise of regional political parties and opposition ruled states, the political establishment at the Centre came forward with many centrally sponsored schemes which invariably overlaps with the schemes of the States or Panchayati Raj institutions. It results into a situation where there are funds for the schemes that the villagers do not need, and the thing of their need on which they want money to invest have no funds. Then there is overlapping of schemes and functions of the Centre, the States and the Panchayati Raj Institutions.

There are twelve States and Union Territories who are yet to constitute District Planning Committes (DPCs) the nodal agency envisaged in the Panchayati Raj Act to ensure devolution of powers to the grassroots. The Punjab has recently begun the process and is scheduled to decentralise its PRIs by October 2, this year. However, Jammu and Kashmir is yet to adopt the provisions of the Act. The states failed to constitute such committees include Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Goa , Gujarat, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Pondicherry.

It can be concluded that barring few exceptions, the States in general are more or less disinterested in devolution of power to Panchayati Raj Institutions as it would mean losing control over funds hitherto routed through the State Governemnts. But we can deal with such a situation because no state is free to violate any constitutional provision of this country. The Centre can always take action against the erring State Governments. The Centre can give them directions under Article 256 of the Constitution of India and initiate legal actions against them. The Centre has sufficient powers to enforce the constitutional provisions and ensure that there is no constitutional breakdown in any state. But nobody at the Centre is interested in such a measure.
Now , the political establishment has disclosed its mind recently to do more politics in the states. With this sole purpose, the Union Ministry of Rural Development has come forward with a proposal of another Constitutional Amendment to make it mandatory to give greater financial and administrative powers to PRIs. It has already instituted awards for best Zila Panchayats, Blocks, Taluka and Gram Panchayats. An Empowered sub-committee has also been constituted to study the progress regarding devolution of power. In the very first meeting of the sub-committee it was emphasised that the DPCs must occupy the requisite significant role for the overall achievement of the country's development goals. All these means not initiating action against erring state governments but more central politics at the district level.

There is of course a welcome feature in the proposed Central legislation for demarcation of the areas that should lie within the jurisdiction of panchayats. But the pattern of funding and function which is generally imposed from the Centre and the States would not do justice to them. Let them decide what they want at the grassroots level. The planning and implementation should be left to them in all the 29 subjects which are exclusively earmarked for them. The Centre and the States should give them only funds, expertise and knowledge base, and supervise them in their need. Let us begin the national building exercise from the bottom. It may reduce the burden of the Planning and implementation agencies of the Centre and the State and may save the exchequer. Planners and officials at the top, including ruling politicians should not fear of losing power over their subjects and should show some magnanimity. The exercises of national building from the top downwards are bound to fail.