Dr.Rao VBJ Chelikani
Bad governance by the
governments and political instability are the main characteristics of all
developing countries for the past seventy years, ever after their liberation
from colonial domination. In spite of it, there has been political stability
among a majority of Asian countries, since their national economic affairs are
not controlled by bureaucracy. Many atrocities are being committed by the
political leaders in Africa; much violence by the states in Latin America and
subtle but firm politico-bureaucratic authoritarianism in Asia are widely
prevalent. And, India is no exception to it, even after 75 years of formal
democratic practices. The governments while claiming to be democratic have
become the root cause of all evils and stagnation in many societies in the
world. Finally, we are at loss to understand whether good governance can bring
democracy or democracy would bring good governance.
Good governance by an
authoritarian government is not really Good Governance. Democratic Governance
is Self- Governance and Self- governance is Good Governance, whatever might be
the initial chaos. In a democracy, the ultimate aim is to pass political power
to people individually and collectively and to help them rule themselves. The
role of the people’s Representatives is only to facilitate this process by
liquidating the concentration of power in the hands of a few. They are neither
trustees nor custodians of the people by whom they are elected. The individual
has to be facilitated to govern himself not only in political matters but also
in all aspects of his social life. This is the governance of all human
relations with the sole objective of human development and social development.
Broadly Good Governance
(GG) means a set of processes of collective management of human relations in a
society to live together in an orderly and harmonious manner. It deals with
official and non-official members involved in decision-making and implementing
the decisions made, and the formal and informal structures that have been set
in place to arrive at and to implement the decisions. This yardstick applies to
all institutions in society, as they are interdependent, and also process
covers global governance, state governance, corporate governance, municipal
governance and local governance at the level of the Resident Welfare
Association. In urban areas, the situation is much more vibrant and complex as
it includes, senior citizen associations, cooperatives, NGOs, research
institutes, religious institutions, financial institutions, schools, colleges,
universities, professional establishments and their associations, and also
trade unions and political parties, etc. Referring to the nature of relations,
governance can be classified and viewed as political governance, economic
governance, social governance and cultural governance. Thus, governance is
entity-wise management of all human relations.
By the United Nation's
standards, it should be normally participatory, consensus oriented,
accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and
inclusive and follow the rule of law. It should reduce the role of bribes,
gifts and profits by exploitation and speculation and other effects of political
nepotism and bureaucratic corruption. Above all, it implies non-violent
participation and constructive dialogue in order to build consensus in
decision-making, the views of minorities should be taken into account, without
simply deciding by a bull-dozing majority. It should be responsive to the
present and future needs of the evolving society.
1. Political Governance:
Unfortunately, in a developing country, including in India, at present, the whole society is dominated and influenced by political preoccupations and power struggles by an emerging political class, which divides itself into mutually fighting political parties. We are living in a regime of rule by the political parties, which are imposing their political interests upon the society, and not in a regime of rule by the people's Representatives, even though that does not seem to be the intention of the Indian constitution. In this struggle for political power, other 'soft' powers in the society that should influence society are being ignored, and other aspects of social life and other social and human accomplishments are becoming secondary. The state has become the sole depository of all force and the governments are the principal instruments to handle all powers.
At the national level,
in addition to the above actors, lobbyists, vested interests, national and
multi-national corporations, media, inter-state Groups or blocs, donors, and
national and international non-governmental organisations or civil society
organisations, etc. may play a role in decision-making or in influencing the
decision-making process. But, at present, unfortunately, the political parties
are over-jealous of their power to decide, do not recognise, do not promote and
do not encourage the role of the intelligentsia in the country and others, such
as, ‘kitchen cabinets’, policy research think-tanks, or those in scientific
research, academic institutes and professional bodies. In India, at present,
there is a visible dichotomy between the world of the political class and the
world of the ‘intelligentsia’ and civil societies. Hence, most of the policies
and programmes are designed to cater to the needs of vested interests or
seasonal electoral reasons, neglecting the interests of the taxpayers. The
political class is not respected and not credible, but feared by the public, as
a necessary evil.
Good governance
requires the 'rule of law' for all as the legal framework that enforces
impartially. It also requires unreserved and unconditional respect and
protection of human rights, particularly those of minorities. When outside and
impartial observers like the UN Human Rights Council point out certain
imperfections, we should not bluntly oppose their suggestions stating that we
consider it as interference in the internal affairs of sovereign India. If so,
where are the concepts of ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam and the Sarvodaya ideal of Jai
Jagat? Impartial enforcement of laws requires an independent judiciary and an
impartial and incorruptible police force. Transparency means that decisions are
taken and their enforcement is done in a manner that follows rules and
regulations scrupulously. In the case of spending tax-payers money i.e. public
expenditure, it is evident to all that there is constant misuse. The
information, including the information collected by the 'Intelligent services'
should be freely available and directly accessible to those who will be
affected by such decisions and their enforcement. It implies that there should
be no exceptions either in the private sector or in the public sector to the
RTI Act in the public interest. It also means that enough information is to be
easily accessible and understandable.
2. Bureaucratic Governance:
The state is a
Leviathan: a mammoth establishment with millions of staff and political
functionaries, however forming only 3 or 4% of the population; but it is
consuming almost 50 to 65% of the nation’s resources, leaving the rest to the
welfare of 96 to 97% of the population.
Respecting and trusting
the resident, and his or her potential to grow even by making mistakes should a
part of the ruling philosophy. However, on the contrary, the philosophy of the
operators of the state is to treat and keep the people as infants who are to be
taken care of by a benevolent guardian officer. It is a process of
‘infantilisation’ of the citizen and does not facilitate the democratic
evolution of individual's attitudes and rapid social transformations.
The state and its
governments, at present, have a monopoly of centralised political governance,
and the bureaucracy is exclusively controlling foreign affairs and economic
affairs of the nation, in which the political representatives do not have much
say. Even after 74 years of republican life, the state continues to produce
soaps in state-run factories and runs hotels for tourists by government
officers. Yet, it is also confirmed during these years that government
functionaries are not holier than the common man. They are neither more honest
nor more efficient, and do not take personal risks. At present, governmental
affirmations are unverifiable by a third party, and their statistics are selective.
The well-remunerated State employees should be responsive to
serve all stakeholders within a reasonable timeframe, but, administrative
delays are notorious and inherent to the hierarchical bureaucracy. If you
criticise a bad rule, the department takes the occasion to make more rules in
it's place to retain control over the situation. In most states, nobody knows
how many G.O.s are there, and nobody knows which one the officer is going to
pick up to justify his ruling. The Administrative Reforms promised since
Morarji Desai never came. The public who reads or listens to this kind of
criticism of the state of affairs, coolly turns away from the page or skips to
another channel, considering, cynically that it is logically inevitable in the
present political reality. A kind of fatalism which is not new.
On the other hand, the authorities are becoming increasingly intolerant, aggressive and authoritarian, making no distinction between opinions, suggestions, grievances, complaints, genuine criticism and motivated opposition. No message or letter from the civil society activist is ever acknowledged, much less than replied to. Gradually, there are enough rules and laws, in place, to justify any officer to arrest or conduct a house raid upon anybody in order to harass him or her for having exercised the freedom of speech, even with pacific intention and constructive purpose. This, of course, is very normal in Russia and China. The constitutional right to form and run an association is also being curtailed by harassment, whereas forming a political party and collection of funds by them goes on undisturbed. The Election Commission of India, a constitutional body whose autonomy is so vital for preserving our democratic practices is being filled with former government officers, and it consults only the political parties as the stakeholders and not the voters. An insider, who has been the vice-president of our Republic recently, had stated in an official speech that there is a clear nexus between the bureaucrats and the politicians to continue the present state of corruption and nepotism. (to be continued……)
0 Comments