Raman Bhalla
The narrative surrounding the panchayats has gone sour. From being touted as democratic deepening by one and all, the event is increasingly being seen as the singular failure of the government after the resignation of some panches and sarpanches. Allegations are flying thick and fast that the entrenched vested interest in the government has scripted the sabotage in this otherwise gripping narrative. Media in general has picked up the ‘dark twist’ in the plot and run with it. The chief minister, Omar Abdullah’s response, typical of a man who is pushed to the corner, that ‘we did not cause this situation; even a section of the congress party is not entirely amenable to the empowerment of panchayats; and we have done the required empowerment of these units’, has not helped the matters either. As a consequence, the initial exchanges of barbs are fast graduating into a no holds barred battle for securing brownie points in the amphitheatre of the politics, sadly, at the expense of the hapless sarpanches and panches.
The narrative of panchayats was always going to be a multiple steps affair. Time was an important variable in the plot. It was to be more in the mould of a period drama rather than a fast paced thriller. Spectators, therefore, had to be patient, but vigilant. However, actors also had a responsibility to throw up cues every now and then to the watching audience about the unfolding scene to sustain the interest. While the cast had their differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities chalked out, where the plot has gone dull and drab is in the cast completely missing the trick. That is where the plot has fizzled out before the mandatory thickening.
There are three strands to the debate. Political, administrative and security related. Political strand is where the damage has happened the most. Politically, the panchayat election was the trump card of the ruling dispensation. It typified both symbolism and the substantive. Symbolism- because the message endogenous to the conduct of elections in the rural hinterland was one of the state being fully in command. There was a signal underlying the act that the democracy was being taken to where it belongs; that for once fear had stopped fearing us; and that the people had manifested unshakeable yearning to run for these elections shaking off their longstanding security blues to serve at the grass root level. Substantive- for there was a feeling that no worthwhile institutional deepening would come about, if the democratic fuel was not put in the centrifuge of the marginalised hinterland; and that more inclusive and sustainable growth would happen only, if people in villages were put in command of their own fate. Now that the process has hit the road block, the message is lost and the messenger is seen as a charlatan.
Administrative strand revolved around devising policies and procedures to achieve the envisaged ends. The term policy in the governmental framework broadly covers both the policy aims and the procedures and processes designed to pursue the policy choices. It was the operational part, which involved devolution of powers and framing of processes to execute them. It took time, as is natural in such seminal steps, and eventually identified powers were devolved at all the three levels, namely, panchayats, block and districts, even though the latter two structures had not come into being.
Clearly, there are two issues here. One, the level of delegations does not measure up to the scrutiny of the framework followed in other states, as is the refrain all around. Second, the structural ensemble of the local governance is not complete even though it needed to be completed much earlier. On each of these issues, there is indeed some case made out. For instance, If we have handed out less powers than what others have done, there is need to revisit the existing framework. The grant of powers can’t be hostage to the rationale that is subjectively developed in the power corridors where the line between democracy and bureaucracy often blurs. If the correction requires amending the extant Act on the lines of the 73rd and 74th amendments, then so be it. If the choice is between mannequins (with no effective powers) in panchayats and no panchayats, I would rather suggest that we have none.
Equally for functional local governance set up, the structural arrangements at all the levels need to be in place. There is no point in having one tier functional and other two either non-existent or semi-functional, for each one of them is complementary to other. As I see it, though perceptions may vary, the indictment of the handling of affairs in the instant case survives.
Security was always an important strand of the narrative. It was to hold the new edifice in place. Sadly, even the police have so much as said that there is a vested interest behind the unravelling of the narrative. Well, that is a political statement and coming as it does from the wing of the government that should not have allowed the situation to come to this sorry pass in the first instance, it raises more questions than answer any. After all, have we not been making noises that law and order has taken a turn for the better. And if that was indeed the case (for the most part it appeared so), should not the police have deepened their presence in the rural hinterland and developed human intel to pre-empt the situation. The answer is yes. But on the ground, closer to ground zero, we are still searching for answers. Does this not also reflect that the blame levelled by the friends and opposition sticks?
We need to find answers and find them quickly. If we look ourselves in the eye and admit to wrongs, we will find them quickly. On the other hand, if we bury our head in sand and indulge in mud slinging, we will find the question becoming a questionnaire. Answers will not be found in the misguided attempts to taint some congress MLAs or ministers. They would, however, be (have been) found easily, if the issues were (had been) discussed in the coordination committee or cabinet. When the coalition government has legitimate institutional devices in place to deal with the transactional problems, it is not understood why and where is the need to look to the exogenous sources for redemption. And, finally, answers, certainly, would be (have been) found, if views of Azad and Soz were (had been) heard.
I am worried at the way the opposition sees in it an opportunity to taint the ruling dispensation. I am pained at the attempts being made to stake out an ideology by riding a moral hobby horse when we know that all that there has been is an executive vacuum. Vacuum loves to socialise with the dark and grey and, if we don’t move in to fill it up, we may have an interminable grey to contend with. Now that the stakes have gotten wider and bigger with Rahul Gandhi casting himself in this play, it can be assumed that sanity will be restored in the narrative and the loose ends edited out.; that opposition will see the futility of upping the ante and stop being disruptive; that the cast will go back to doing their assigned roles; and finally, the narrative will hold itself to unfold in the desired manner to sustain interest and make an enduring impact.
(The writer is a Minister for Revenue, Relief and Rehabilitation in the State Government)
Follow our WhatsApp channel