Democratic Decentralization

Introduction

Grassroots democracy is neither a new concept nor is it an expression of western political thought operationalized in Indian soil. The origin of grassroots level democracy dates back to the Vedic Age and has been fairly well documented in ancient scriptures such as the Rig Veda, Aitareya Brahman, Panini’s Astadhyai, Kautilya's Arthasastra, inscriptions on Asokan Pillars and the writings of Buddhist and Jain scholars. The available literature clearly points to the fact that republics functioned and elected representatives participated in Janpadas (regional bodies), Paura Sabhas (City Councils) and Gram Sabhas (Village assemblies) in ancient India. People in republics were functioning through a decision by a majority which was regarded as inviolable and not to be overridden. Issues which required more deliberations and serious thinking were referred to a special committee elected from among the members of the assembly.

Under the British Rule, local self-government did not make much progress. These panchayat institutions were unable to function effectively due to organizational and fiscal maladies. However, with the emergence of Gandhiji on the political arena, grass root level democracy slowly started regaining importance. Gandhiji’s advocacy of village democracy brought the issue to centre stage and laid the foundations for grass root level democracy in modern India. In his article (Harijan, 26 July, 1942) on Village Swaraj, Gandhiji had envisaged a village as a complete Republic, independent of its neighbour for its vital wants, yet interdependent, for many others in which dependence is a necessity. These views got reflected in the non-justiciable part of the Constitution in the Directive Principles of State Policy, as Article 40.

Efforts towards Democratic decentralisation

Soon after Independence, both the Community Development Programme and National Extension Service were launched to address rural reconstruction efforts. The focus of these programmes was on improving agriculture and rural development and bringing about socio economic transformation among the rural people.

The Balwantrai Committee which was appointed to study the Community Development Programme and National Extension Service stated that the community needs to be involved in planning, decision making and implementation process. However, Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) across the country faced resistance from bureaucracy, lacked capacity and were often captured by certain elitist sections of the community.

There after Ashok Mehta Committee appointed in 1978 described the post-1959 period in three phases; a) Ascendancy 1959-64; b) Stagnation -1965- 69; c) Decline - 1969-1977. The Committee recommended that the district should be the basic unit for planning, coordination and resource allocation and should be supported by technical expertise.

The GVK Rao Committee (1985) was of the opinion that PRIs need to play an important role in rural development programmes thus building up a gradual momentum in favour of the local self-government institutions.

In 1986 the Committee for the Concept Paper on Panchayati Raj Institutions recommended that these institutions need constitutional backing. The gram sabha was identified as the base of decentralized democracy and PRI as units of self–government promoting people’s participation.

Although this was opposed by the Sarkaria Commission the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi introduced the 64th Constitutional amendment bill in 1989. As the Bill was defeated in the Rajya Sabha, it was introduced again in 1992 and was passed as the 73rd Constituted Amendment. This Act is a landmark legislation which has brought empowerment of the Panchayat Raj Institutions and has ensured the transfer of power from the State to the panchayat raj institutions to be exercised by the people.

Oppurtunities
“India lives in its villages” is the oft quoted statement of the Father of the Nation. In reality, however, the people of India were far distanced from the seat of power and the Government at the Centre and in the States. The greatest strength of grass root democracy reflected through the Panchayat Raj Institutions is its proximity to the people. It is an important step towards the realization of Gandhiji’s dream of ‘village swaraj’”. Grass root level democracy has a tremendous potential for establishing a people centred delivery system which is essential for sustainable development.

• The village assemblies/Gram Sabhas can emerge as a platform for expression of people’s needs and aspirations. This, in turn, will help to effectively utilize the local resources and pave the way for need based development which would bring visible benefit to the local community. 
• These institutions also provide opportunities for the marginalized and socially excluded groups to participate in decision making. 
• Fundamental requirements for personal advancement such as access to health care and education can be better provided by judicious assessment of needs and allocation of resources. 
• With the people being actually involved in decision making the scope for corruption and misuse of resources and authority get reduced. 
• Close monitoring and social audit are possible for taking corrective action which was not possible in the erstwhile top down approach that was in vogue. 
• The vesting of powers of taxation with the Gram Panchayats has enabled them to increase their resource base for accelerating development. 
• At the panchayat level, there can be very imaginative and pragmatic pooling of resources and convergence of schemes which will bring larger good to the community.
•  Micro level planning which was virtually absent hitherto enables to translate people’s aspirations into need based programmes. 

Weakness

Since the Panchayat Raj Institutions are still in the early stages of development they are yet to overcome several weaknesses which have not enabled them to reach their full potential.

• First and foremost, the Gram Sabha which is considered as the life-line of PRIs by directly reflecting people’s views and voices has to see a much higher level of participation by the entire community. There has also to be much greater involvement and articulation of the needs of the entire community particularly the deprived sections. 
• Secondly there is considerable discretion vested in the state Governments. PRIs falls under the state subject and the legal language of ‘shall’ and ‘may’ and other connotations has led to various levels of conformity by the state Governments. It is seen that several non-obligatory provisions, like the representation of legislators and members of parliament in PRIs, is affecting the true expression of village democracy. 
• Adequate training and sustained hand-holding efforts are not extended to elected representatives. Hence there is a lack of professionalism in handling administrative, financial and other related issues. 
• Devolution of three Fs – Funds, Functions and Functionaries which is imperative for effective public service delivery has not yet taken place in many states. 

The District planning committee has been constituted. However, its performance levels need to be improved by making the District Panchayat Chairman as its head and reducing the role of in charge Ministers.

The weaknesses which are highlighted are structural. A greater amount of political will is essential to enable these bodies to function as true democratic institutions. Notwithstanding these weaknesses, it is very heartening to note that in many parts of the country the Panchayat Raj Institutions has emerged as powerful vehicles for social transformation. Some examples of best practices are stated below:

1. Karnataka has very innovatively used the Panchayat Raj system to improve revenue realization in the power sector. Under the Participatory Rural Energy Services in Karnataka, Gram Panchayat (GP) members were trained to offer electricity support services and transfer best practices for water farming and electricity management. 
2. Integrated Rural Accessibility Planning (IRAP) is concerned with improving access in rural areas of Orissa (ILO). IRAP comprises a set of planning tools for use at Gram Panchayat level to identify and prioritize interventions to improve accessibility. The process responds to the access needs of rural people and interventions to either improve mobility (roads, tracks, bridges, transport services) or bring the services and goods closer to the people (markets, schools, health centres, water supplies). 
3. Indira Kranthi Pathakam (IKP) in Andhra Pradesh has evolved a strategy for enabling the Village Organizations in 700 Gram Panchayats in 259 Mandals to facilitate all the poor households to secure their Rights and Entitlements under MGNREGA fully and also to ensure that the Employment Guarantee Scheme investments are secured to develop the lands belonging to the poor. The strategy is to position a team of Community Resource Persons in select Gram Panchayats to provide grass root level support to the Village Organisations. It is expected that these 700 Gram Panchayats will emerge as EGS Model Villages for demonstrating a framework for implementing NREGS in a manner that all the Rights and Entitlements guaranteed to the wage seekers are fulfilled in letter and spirit. 
4. In Uttar Pradesh, MidDay Meal programme is managed by the Gram Panchayats. Information on menu, the quantity of ingredients needed for feeding 100 children and funds received for the programmes are disseminated through the Gram Panchayats through wall writings, etc.. The funds for the programme are deposited in a separate account in village fund so that account of expenditure can be maintained. Food items are supplied on a monthly basis in advance. A committee has been constituted at gram panchayat level to supervise day-to-day cooking at school level with Gram Pradhan, and representation from parents. This intervention has improved the quality and delivery of the Mid Day Meal Programme. 
5. Understanding the actual cause of the heavy school drop outs among tribal children, Vellamunda Panchayat in Wayanad district has used its resources imaginatively to arrest the drop out rate and increase retention of children in the schools. It hired five jeeps and launched its own ‘transport service’ to ferry the children to and from the school and introduced a free breakfast and noon meal scheme to retain the children in the 18 schools within the panchayat limits as part of six projects costing Rs.22 lakh annually. 

Challenges ahead

The decentralized governance system ushered in through the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments in 1993-94 have not been able to pick up the required momentum on account of several challenges confronting the PRIs. Some of the challenges are listed below: 

1. Constitution of certain types of Committees not in line with the spirit of PRIs especially for several donor driven programmes, is moving away from the objectives enshrined in the Constitution. Similarly, the strengths of Self Help Groups need to be integrated for improving the capability of the Panchayats. 
2. An organic linkage between gram sabha and gram panchayat is yet to be forged. Consequently, resolutions passed in Gram Sabha generally do not get reflected in the identified needs of Gram Panchayat, both in terms of human resource and infrastructure development. 
3.  In many states, GPs do not constitute viable administrative units due to their geographical areas and physical distances from potential growth centres and sheer inaccessibility due to lack of proper infrastructure such as roads and connectivity. Delimitations on the basis of population distances and access need to be done in some States. 
4. The higher outlays and number of programmes require a much higher level of capability and professionalism for delivering the desired results. 
5. Physical infrastructure also needs to be substantially improved at the Panchayat level for data maintenance, record keeping etc. 

Despite these challenges, the PRIs have been playing a role as institutions of local governance in the changing scenario of rural development. Some of the positive trends are as follows: 

1. PRIs are increasingly recognized as the best available alternative to implement several developmental programs and of late GPs are made to play a pivotal role in the planning and implementation process. Direct funding is also being made available for speedy implementation of programmes. 
2. Since various Ministries and donor agencies have started adopting the ‘Saturation approach’ in developmental programmes by extending the delivery to the last man, PRI institutions have started to play an enlarged role in identification, planning and implementation. 
3. Social audits at PRI level have shown that people’s participation is both qualitatively and effectively resolving local problems. 
4. The performance of the PRIs is evaluated both by national and international agencies (Google) and they are given awards, which has led to increased motivation on part of PRIs. Due to this, over the years, one comes across several performing GPs who are recognized as Beacon Panchayats and role models for others. They have been successful in converging both human and financial resources and have been successful in promoting social and economic equity. 

Conclusion 

Grass root level democracy has come to stay in India through the instrumentality of 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment. While on the one side of the spectrum there are very active and strong PR Institutions, at the other end we have a large number of PRIs which are not in a position to perform effectively. The performance levels of the PRIs have been directly proportionate to levels of transfer of 3 ‘F’s’ viz., Functions, Functionaries and Funds. Since the devolution of the powers and functions are within the ambit of the State Government and the Act does not make it mandatory for full-fledged transfer of powers, the PRIs have not developed uniformly across the country. With the implementation of more rural development programmes through the PRIs and increase in the budgetary outlays (e.g., MGNREGA – 40,000 crores, NSAP 3000 crores) the resource base of the PRIs has increased. 

The challenges to translate these schemes very effectively at the ground level for the benefit of the common people have also brought pressure on the PRIs to play their role more effectively. The efforts made by institutions such as the National Institute of Rural Development and the State Institutes of Rural Development and other agencies for capacity development of the functionaries is also showing positive results, in terms of improved delivery by the PRIs. Increased participation of women in PR institutions resulting from higher percentages of reservation is slowly changing the face of PRIs. More acceptable and sustainable developmental trends are emerging through the interventions of PR Institutions with more participation of women elected representatives. 

The establishment of Self Help Groups in many States, the participation of NGOs and CBOs working together with the PR Institutions is a promising trend which, if guided properly, can improve the delivery of governing systems at the grass root level.