The quality of good governance depends largely on the quality of leader

-Mrs. Chitralekha Yadav, Deputy Speaker, Nepalese Parliament

Let me begin with a personal note. I have fought a long time for democracy in Nepal before being elected as a member of parliament and becoming Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives. As a women parliamentarian and as a Deputy Speaker, I have found more responsibilities than my male counterpart: represent the people of my constituency, help formulate better legislation in the parliament which serves the interests of majority of people including women, and help strengthen an order based on democracy and social justice in the country. The restoration of democracy in Nepal in 1990 has offered us the opportunities to create a normative and legal edifice of democracy. Now, a search is underway for new policies, strategies and institutions suitable for the interests and priorities of Nepalese people.

The qualities of leadership also marked a paradigm shift from the patrimonial and status-bound to democratic and transformative one. Transformative leaders are driven by a vision rooted in the insight and wisdom of the nation’s heritage, imbued with a strong political morality and inspired by their strength of solidarity with the people. They often act by their wisdom, persuasion, teamwork and consensus in their relation to the life experience of common people and act on the hope that there are tremendous human possibilities to overcome their insecurity.

Transformative leaders are specially motivated by the desire to create a new society out of their knowledge of the nature of human beings and balances their needs, wants and what they are able to obtain. By sheer political courage in articulating the ways on how to execute social transformation, they pose the challenges to the very core of the antiquated political and social order that sustained a permanent underclass in the country. In the South Asian region in general and Nepal in particular the strategy of good governance requires the liberation of untouchable caste, Dalits from exclusion, subordination of women to men and the marginalization of majority of people from public life. Transformative leaders transform the people into public and their rights and duties of citizenship become the rationalistic foundation to challenge feudalistic culture and institutions. These leaders hold the prospect of avoiding past mistakes and make the national life better than it is today.

The quality of good governance depends largely on the quality of leader. A leader of high moral standing possess the vision of creating the future. Without the politics of transformation this is not possible. Transformative leaders, then, must have the ability to look beyond next elections and become performance-oriented. A sound performance requires creating and sustaining high performing organizations and individuals those who have faith in change rather than who stick to status and authority.

Since leadership possess power, they must have the character of being open, transparent and accountable to the public so that power is not misused. The elements of good governance involves new mechanisms, processes, relationships and institutions through which leadership represents all the groups and people, not just the "top men" placed strategically at the apex of power and positively manages the affairs of public life. Government is the representative of "public power" and, therefore, it must honestly exercise its power to protect popular interest as well as mediate their differences.

The state alone can guarantee the rights of people and render basic services. The legitimacy of state-craft, after all, depends on the consent of those on whom power is exercised. Yet, the prevailing situation illustrates that governance is no longer the sole prerogative of the government. A number of institutions, such as right-based groups, civil society and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and social movements of people claim to have a role in the governance of the nation and society. This brought to the fore partnership culture.

The mutual commitment of the holders of power, the private sector and civil society for securing the standard of conduct, integrity and accountability underlies the essence of good governance. Freedom of the public springs from their tangible capacity to follow alternative course of action in social, economic and political life. The government’s commitment to good governance, to act against patronage, nepotism and corruption as well as to the realization of human rights set the framework for good governance.

Good governance requires effective participation of people in the state, civil society and private sectors. It also requires building up the capacity of people to realize their subjective and objective rights and interests. The South Asian region as a whole and my own country is seething with "democratic resurrection" of previously underrepresented group. It is a time to build the foundations for a century with bold new efforts to empower the poor, women and marginalized sections of society. If the bonds of family, community, society and civic institutions that sustained our public lives are not protected well, the economic and technological globalization may overwhelm our civilization and weaken our pride in our civic institutions. The greatest challenge facing our countries is the need to create a just system that not only maximizes economic growth but also achieves a greater measure of equity, integrates the rich and the poor and assist the marginalized people in their efforts to participate in national development.

On the question of making governance gender equitable, there are efforts underway to re-negotiate social contract with the family, community, local government, the state and international regimes in the basis of democratic principles. It is essential to build the capacity of women to meet the need for greater social integration, greater representation in the policy-making and public affairs. A sense of justice, however, must prevail over the negotiation so that it becomes just and sustainable.

There are five keys to transformative leadership. They must have to define the realistic agenda of good governance transcending the old option of left-right divide, establish the ethical principles and policies of good governance, bridge the growing gap among bottom-up, top-down and horizontal approaches to governance, mobilize the people loyal to the agenda and blend policy competence with the ability to explain and sell policy innovations to the press and public and set a broad parameter of positive direction. Without meeting these basic preconditions, it will be impossible to create and sustain constituencies powerful enough to legislate social transformation. After all, transformative vision requires women leaders to solicit more gender-specific, fair and sustainable priorities for development.

What we are encountering in the region is that unfulfilled promises of the past have discredited many of leaders on several fronts and devastated their credibility before the public. The very magnitude of national problems, such as poverty, population explosion, inequality, alienation and discrimination have came to haunt democratic order and daily test the efficacy of leadership in solving them.

At a time of public displeasure with our governments’ ability to act, serve or lead is growing, I hope, this conference will be able to provide a new governing philosophy and a new set of ideas that can break the barriers to gender equality, move beyond exhausted politics of left-right divide and make a newly visualized public sphere realistic one as a catalyst for democratic consolidation.

We cannot evade responsibility for our actions by arguing that invisible factors made us to do so. Here, then, is the battle field, the meeting point of freedom and fate, life and death. Let the flame of freedom burn and shine, flickering in the vast expanses of transformation process.

Transformative leadership function like statesman. Here, I fully agree with the wise remarks of Edmund Burke "A Statesman differs from a professor in an university; the latter has only the general view of society; the former, the statesman, has a number of circumstances to combine with those general ideas, and to take into his consideration. Circumstances are infinite, are infinitely combined; are variable and transient; he who does not take them into consideration is not erroneous, but stark mad...A statesman, never losing sight of principles, is to be guided by circumstances; and, judging contrary to the exigencies of the moment, he may ruin his country forever."

Rationality in Decisions: Public interest is intimately related to administrative decisions. The process of choosing and implementing policies is called decision-making. Harold D. Lasswell suggests that rationality in decision-making involves the processes of "intelligence, recommendation, prescription, invocation, application, appraisal and termination." Civil servants give reasons for their decisions. Bureaucracy adopting the rules and principles of the state take into account the costs and benefits of decisions as modern government operates on the basis of pure rationality, rather than egoism or self-interests. The ethics of civil servants is to fulfill their assign duties prescribed as rational agent rather than having strong political preference in favor of particular interest group of society which undermines their rationality and utility.

Autonomy in Policy Making. Public policy making is the process of executing the objectives of the political system concerning the welfare of people. A policy purports to review information and determination of action on the basis of available resources. Scientific management and classical public administration schools consider policy making business a rationalistic search for action independent of sectoral or political consideration of those in power. The model of autonomy in policy making presupposes that public welfare does not become embroiled in a quagmire of in-fighting among factions and rendered thoroughly incompetent in settling pressing collective issues. The autonomy of civil servants involved in policy making provides them necessary freedom in deciding, and hence, makes them answerable to their responsibility and law. The justification of autonomy compatible with authority of civil servants seems to have a strong utilitarian route. Under what condition autonomy and authority become compatible? In policy making, collective pursuit of goals can have better rationale than individual ones.

ransparency in Administration is the key element in bureaucratic accountability. It involves the openness of bureaucratic decisions, functions and transactions, especially public accounts and audit reports, to public scrutiny. Transparency in administration not only makes the functionaries of the state efficient but also detects corrupt practices. Transparency in the allocation of resources, budget and public expenditure procurement makes the optimal use of resources. Media, civil society, judiciary can exert tremendous influence if transparency is maintained and public service accountability reinforces.

Impersonality: An impersonal administrator is the one who is not influenced by his/her personal human feelings or biased towards one’s superiors, powerful persons or relatives in rendering his/her assigned service to the public. Impersonality is the system that encourages the officials to proceed their work according to the framework of accountability and institutional ethics that leads to fulfilling the goals and interests of the government and the citizens in an impartial manner.

Integrity means those holders of public office should have the quality of being honest and having moral principles and not be tempted to place themselves under any financial or other inducements that might influence them in the performance of their institutional duties and responsibilities. Civil servants are expected to be imbued with values transmitted by the society and, therefore, have to follow the principles of fairness in pursuing commitments to the public interests.

Tenacity. A rational administrator in the one who is complete with skill and determination, keeps firm hold on his/her duties, principles, rules and regulation as well as course of action. He/ she does not let the rules violate easily. An honest administration tenaciously pursues the decisions on a rational basis, does not decide arbitrarily and values the due process of law on its own sake as an end.

Conformity to Rules means an administrator must act according to the tasks defined for him/her by the law and must not deviate from his jurisdiction, which makes him/her weak.

Initiative is the capacity and imagination of administrator to realize what needs to be done, together with the courage and willingness to do it, with his/her own initiative. An administrator must have the power, opportunity and a new approach to resolve a difficulty.

Boldness, Forthrightness in Conduct. An administration must be confident, courageous and enterprising in his work and honest in his/her manner and speech while doing assigned duties in the public. The new public service model is underpinned by different values, the prominent being money measured in terms of economy, effectiveness and efficiency and allows the people better informed of the reasoning about the government policies, actions and decisions.

Tenacity to oppose Illegal Orders. In a well-established bureaucracy it is the rule and regulation that govern the behavior of civil servants, not illegal orders from his/ her super-ordinates. Tenacity of civil servants to oppose illegal order is the beginning of establishing an honest system of government, presupposing a harmony between their conduct and performance as well as making them answerable to the public. Ethical conduct abjures undue interference in the lives of others and whenever possible disallows other people from committing such misdemeanor. Unwillingness or incapacity to oppose such behavior breeds corruption.

Indecisiveness vs Speed. Inability to make decision or hesitancy on the part of administrator weakens the speedy function of administrators and affects the level of desirable performance.

Honesty vs. Sycophancy kills the spirits of public administration. An administration who tries to gain powerful persons’ favor by insincere praise or always agreeing with them fails to discharge the responsibility assigned to him/her and weakens his/her own morale and integrity. Ethics, equity, morality and justice are cardinal principles of honest behavior.( Text of the paper presented by the author in Bangkok, Thailand, at an international seminar held in March, 2000, last month-Chief editor).

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past |