Local Good Governance For Effective Service Delivery
By Krishna Man Pradhan
The people’s movement of April, 2006 became successful because, among other reasons, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 and various laws failed to fulfill the public aspirations to enjoy services and benefits from the state in a quick, efficient, and economical manner and from close proximity. In the language of good governance, such service delivery needs to be transparent, sustainable, participatory and cost effective. Whether central or federal system, most of the citizens are raising their voices in favor of institutionalizing good governance at local level whereby they can make their own decisions.
The People’s Movement of 2006 had raised demands like ensuring good governance through restructuring of the state and allowing people to determine the system of service delivery they want. With the success of the movement, Interim Constitution of Nepal 2007 has been promulgated. Although the new constitution has been promulgated, the state affairs are being conducted with many old laws and the people are now even preparing to launch third people’s movement. Due to the lack of coordination among the interim constitution and existing laws, even though the state is spending double amount to try to deliver service to the people, the latter are forced to bear huge cost to obtain such service.
According to the Article 139 of the Interim Constitution, “arrangements will be made to set up local self governance bodies to ensure the people's exercise of their sovereignty by creating congenial atmosphere and thereby ensuring maximum peoples' participation in the country's governance, and also by providing services to the people at the local level and for the institutional development of democracy, based on the principle of decentralization and devolution of power.” This article denotes that people should be able to exercise their sovereignty from the local level itself.
On the other hand, there is the Local Self Governance Act (LSGA, 1999), which aims to make local bodies effective, efficient and powerful, and capable of mobilizing resources for launching development efforts. But this LSGA has not been effectively implemented.
At present, there are two kinds of local level agencies – the branches of state organization such as district administration office, forest office, land revenue office, agriculture and livestock office etc as well as local bodies such as Village Development Committee (VDC), municipalities, and District Development Committee (DDC).
Owing to the political instability, the fresh elections for the local bodies have not been conducted. On the other hand, government employees who are currently operating the local bodies are not working in a secure environment in Terai region. In this situation, it does not look easy to deliver service to the people.
Although there is an understanding to carry out development activities with the consent of eight parties, the same has not happened in all the places. In terms of service delivery, while central government and local bodies are the deliverers, the common public, private sector and civil society are the recipients.
The analysis of the legal and practical issues related with the local self governance and effective service delivery throws up a number of strengths and weaknesses of the current system.
Strengths & Weaknesses
The strong points of the current system include the clear demarcation of area of operation, functions, duties and authorities of VDCs, municipalities and DDCs by the LSGA and its rules. It has also separated the works for the central and local bodies.
The existing laws have clearly laid down principles of fiscal decentralization and identified ways for resource distribution. In an encouraging sign, donor partners have also started cooperating with the local bodies like DDCs in the spirit of decentralization.
Another positive aspect is the formulation of devolution policy by the government whereby it has started testing devolution in agriculture, health, education and communication sector since last four years.
The grants to the local bodies have been increased and public participation enhanced. Even though there is an absence of elected leadership in the local bodies at present, the eight parties have been operating/monitoring programs in mutual consent.
In the area of planning and implementation, the local bodies have started to plan their programs on their own. By allowing them to identify relevant plans and implement them, the sense of ownership and responsibility has shot up among the local bodies. For instance, in all the 75 districts, the DDCs formulated district transport master-plan and in 52 districts, they even started preparing periodic plans. To increase transparency/accountability the system of public hearing has been introduced. The local bodies have developed ties and coordination with local civil society organizations. The concepts like inclusive democracy have also been promoted.
The weaker points, however, are no less. Since last five years the local bodies are running without elected leadership. The devolution is limited in four sectors and the processes like plan formulation, program monitoring and evaluation are very weak.
In the absence of election, local bodies have become accountable not to the public but to the concerned ministries. In many districts, one VDC secretary is operating more than one VDC due to inability to fill vacancies. Likewise, in many areas, VDC secretaries continue to operate out of district headquarters.
The provision of citizen charter has lost its meaning as the local bodies do not always abide by their promises made in the charter. Public hearing and public accountability have been limited to formalities. Local bodies have not made enough efforts to cooperate and coordinate with local civil society organizations, community groups and private sector. They have weak relation with political parties and the people.
The local bodies have also failed to carry out development efforts that are in the interest of marginalized communities including women, Janajati, Dalit, children, disabled etc. In municipalities, the non-productive expenditures are very high due to over-staffing and high administrative spending.
Conclusion
In the current situation, there must be some sort of interim management to ensure effective service delivery and local good governance. The constitution to be written by Constituent Assembly will determine the final shape and structure of the state. Till then, state needs to satisfy the demands and issues of the people by way of effective local good governance. As such, in order to ensure accountability, transparency and public confidence, the government must nominate leaders of eight parties and opposition at the VDCs, municipalities and DDCs. Likewise, the security for VDC secretaries must be ensured. Good governance should be translated from theory into practice. Likewise, the public, civil society, political parties and intellectuals should also work to promote the culture of receiving service in lawful manner by fulfilling legal provisions. If all of us carry out our duties, the concerned authority will be compelled to become accountable.
(Pradhan is president of Rural Development Foundation)
