Governance is an outcome of a system. It is a
yardstick to measure the performance of a system/organ of a body. Performance
and governance-deficit of a system are inversely proportional to each other.
Its product is a constant. This means if one is increasing the other is
automatically decreasing. Decreasing performance means increasing governance
deficit.
Nowadays,
the buzz word in different media is corruption in India. Front page headlines
in print and prime time news in visual media are corruption. This news is
coming from all branches of our government. All organs of our government are
inflicted with the ailment of governance deficit. This deficit of the branch
reduces its required performance.
Governance is the act of governing. It
relates to decisions that define expectations, grant power, or verify performance. It consists of
either a separate process or part of management or leadership processes. These processes and
systems are typically administered by a government. The Word Bank defines governance as: the manner in
which power is exercised in the management of a country's economic and social
resources for development.
The Government of India, officially known as the Union Government, and also known as the Central Government, was established by the Constitution of India,
and is the governing authority of the union of 28 states and seven union
territories. The government comprises three branches: the executive, the
legislative and the judiciary.
The duties and functions of
legislative branch generally is law making: this includes making and passing of
new laws, and amending and repealing of old laws.
The objective classification adopted by the
scholars, categorized Indian Parliament as a reactive institution. The
Legislative institutions that react to the policies, decision proposed by the
executive are reactive institutions.
If we
look back a little and evaluate the performance of the Parliament and State
legislatures through the conduct of the houses in the formative period, it
could be seen that Jawaharlal Nehru, an ardent devotee of parliamentary
democracy and a builder of Parliament, devoted his whole attention in evolving
modern devices for representation.
He conducted lengthy sessions to transact
business and gave adequate time for the voicing of dissent. Opposition views
were respected if not incorporated in the decision. Thus lengthy sessions were
conducted. Barring a few, all decisions were taken only in the legislative
bodies. Ordinance was a rare phenomenon.
Nehru once cautioned the
members, that unless the members are equipped to face the technical subjects
prepared by the bureaucrats, the Parliament has no relevance in
decision-making. Gradually, the composition of the Legislative institutions has
been changed. New elites grabbed the opportunities made possible due to the
retirement of veteran politicians who were no longer useful. The generalist
tendencies of the legislators pave the way for the domination of bureaucrats in
the decision making process.
The Association for Democratic Reforms
(ADR) was established in 1999 by a group of professors from the Indian
Institute of Management (IIM) Ahmedabad. The slogan of ADR is “No Office in this land is more important
than that of being a citizen - Felix Frankfurter.” Our
goal is to improve governance and strengthen democracy by continuous work in
the area of Electoral and Political Reforms. It
conducts multiple projects aimed at increasing transparency and accountability
in the political and electoral system of the country.
ADR is
working in close coordination with Election Commission of India (ECI). ECI has
recommended many political reforms. The reforms list is available online. But
none is serious to take up it. It is due for long. Political parties and actors
are facing heavy criticism for not resorting this reform. As a result, public
confidence is reducing day by day in our political masters and such
institutions run and won by them. We are leading towards a grave situation.
Indian bureaucracy is the worst in Asia with a 9.21
rating out of 10, according to a report by a prestigious consulting firm based
in Hong Kong. India fared worse than Vietnam (rated at 8.54),Indonesia (8.37), Philippines (7.57) and China (7.11), said the report by Political
& Economic Risk Consultancy Ltd released in Jan 2012. The report said India's inefficient bureaucracy was
largely responsible for most of the biggest complaints that business executive
have about the country.
The bureaucrats were rarely held
accountable for wrong decisions and it would be extremely difficult to
challenge them when there were disagreements, it said."This gives them
(bureaucrats) terrific powers and could be one of the main reasons why average
Indians as well as existing and would-be foreign investors perceive India's
bureaucrats as negatively as they do," said the report.
. Real administrative reform is political in
nature and unless political masters mean business, the rituals will be gone
through but without implementation. There have been two Administrative Reform
Commissions with the first one with the most comprehensive terms of reference.
But when it was ready with its recommendations after 5 years, political
priorities had changed and the reports were promptly put in cold storage.
No political party or Prime Minister has shown
real interest in changing this. If there is no corruption at the political
level, it is easy to deal with corruption at bureaucratic level. Globalization
will force India to reform its bureaucracy further.
Sardar Patel famously called
the bureaucracy the steel frame. Today it seems made of very flexible bamboo.
Not only has it failed to prop up the system but also has actually bent over
backwards to facilitate its decay.
The bureaucrats actually must
share greater burden for all that is wrong than politicians. Politicians at
least have the challenge to be elected every five years. Moreover, running a
party as well as fighting elections is expensive affairs. So it is in their
nature to please special interests and chase easy money.
Bureaucrats have no such
compulsion. Their compromising themselves stems purely out of a lust for power
and goodies including nice-post retirement assignments. It is time for a
change. Officers suffer from too little competition and accountability.
The bureaucrats have made
little use of protection. It was supposed to make them more independent but
they have willingly surrendered their independence to cozy up to politicians in
order to get plum postings and other favours.
The steel
frame has become bamboo now. Is it possible to run a 21st century economy,
galvanized by 22nd century ideas and social networks, with a 20th century
bureaucracy, interpreting 19th century laws? One of the few institutions
created by the British, which has survived the test of time in more ways than
one, and yet had some notable failures, is the Indian Administrative
Service (IAS).
Despite prodigious reforms, the IAS has
seen limited change. This is a cause for concern. The classic Westminster
model, on which the IAS is founded, postulated that while politicians would
debate and legislate policy, the civil service would execute it. This has, over
the years, been turned on its head.
Politicians
have found it profitable to get into every aspect of execution and indulge in
rampant corruption, while the civil service is left to write something that
passes off as policy. Add to this the increasing criminalization of civil
servants' political masters and the influence of money power within the system.
The IAS urgently needs reform if it is not to become increasingly irrelevant to
development or be co-opted by the corrupt.
In above light, administrative reform is due
for long. Government of India constituted two administrative reforms committee.
Its recommendations are pending and waiting for its turn to get implemented.
There is no serious attempt in site for its implementation.
An independent and impartial judiciary
and a speedy and efficient system are the very essence of civilization.
However, our judiciary, by its very nature, has become ponderous,
excruciatingly slow and inefficient. Imposition of an alien system, with
archaic and dilatory procedures, proved to be extremely damaging to our
governance and society.
Nani Palkhiwala observed
once, the progress of a civil suit in our courts of law is the closest thing to
eternity we can experience! Our laws and their interpretation and adjudication
led to enormous misery for the litigants and forced people to look for
extra-legal alternatives. Any one, who is even remotely exposed to the problem
of land grabbing in our cities, or a house owner who finds it virtually
impossible to evict a tenant after due notice even for self occupation; can
easily understand how the justice system failed.
The gradual liberalisation of
the Indian economy over the last two decades has of course had profound
implications for the legal system. The efficient judicial enforcement of
contractual obligations as well as property rights is a pre-condition for
generating confidence among domestic as well as foreign entrepreneurs and
investors.
In this regard, the Indian
judiciary – especially at the subordinate level, has been the target of
persistent criticism for mounting arrears as well as inefficiency in disposing
of litigation involving business interests.
The
Indian Judiciary plays an increasingly important role in the life and the
governance of this country. However, anyone who has any experience of the
courts is aware of the serious problems that beset the judicial system.
The issue of judicial
reforms has thus far been discussed in only elite legal/judicial circles or
among various official commissions and committees of the government. For some
time now there has been an increasing realization that this issue needs to be
discussed outside these circles as well and common people of this country who
are the real stakeholders of the system need to get involved in this issue.
The Campaign for
Judicial Accountability & Judicial Reforms (CJAR) works so that
grassroots pressure comes to bear on the authorities for implementing the
needed reforms that will impact: Appointment of Judges and Judicial Accountability,
Access to the Judicial System and Delay in Justice, Values and Attitude of the
Judiciary towards the Poor.
Over a period,
Governance deficit has covered all three branches of our government. This led
us to land in ocean of corruption. Public see it all around and has lost hope
to fight and curb it. They are full of anger and against it and wish to get rid
of this.
But system is not
supporting albeit opposing the crusaders against graft. Civil society
activists- Anna, Baba, Arvind along with tacit supports of higher judiciary and
constitutional bodies like CAG-have brought some ray of hope to them. They are
now able to revive the lost hope.
India Against
Corruption (IAC) member Arvind Kejriwal has entered a new domain and accused
the Congress and the BJP of being hand-in-glove on matters relating to
corruption. This new domain is talk of the town. The consensus on corruption
issue among political parties and actors need to be broken. Arind has made a good start by voicing this
issue loudly. His effort will help in reducing the governance deficit from our
government bodies.
Heera Lal
(Views are personal and based on different
sources) www.makingyouhappy.org
Ref:
No comments:
Post a Comment