Future of Panchayati Raj

Dr. S. Saraswathi
A question mark hangs over the future of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRI) following a massive cut in the budget. Wherein, a former Minister for Panchayati Raj has even expressed an apprehension that the Ministry might face closure.
Undeniably, rapid expansion in various developmental activities requiring big budget, large-scale planning and extensive operation poses a threat to the prospects of small, grassroots institutions.
Thanks to globalization, of which technological advancement is a major part, having touched life in every nook and corner of the country necessitating several adjustments in social-economic life in the countryside voluntarily and involuntarily.
Pertinently, critics are concerned with the cancellation of some schemes and budget cuts and view these as indicators of declining importance of PRIs. Shockingly, the size of the budget for PRIs declined from Rs.7,000 crore to Rs 96 crore last year and two key programmes – The Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF), and Rajiv Gandhi Panchayat Sashaktikaran Abhiyan (RGPSA) were dropped.
However, a closer look reveals that a fresh thinking on utilizing the well-established PRIs is needed today to prepare people and institutions at grassroots to take maximum possible advantages from the global market.
Notably, the Government is quite aware of this. Addressing Gram Sabhas throughout the nation on Panchayati Raj Day (24th April), Prime Minister Modi exhorted panchayat representatives to “initiate transformative changes in villages and bring a positive difference in society during their terms”.
Interestingly, he stressed on reform of local governance through panchayats themselves and through Gram Sabhas. Though institutional changes at the State and Central levels were not considered while fiscal transfer system does not show much confidence in panchayats.
Besides, international organizations like the World Bank encourage economic liberalization to go along with political decentralization.  True, this might involve a complex relationship in actual functioning but it is worthwhile exploring the possibilities and avenues of partnership between the two.
Remember, the Ministry of Panchayati Raj was created as a separate Ministry in the first UPA Government in 2004 with the objective of promoting decentralized and participatory local self-government. Its mission was set as empowerment, enablement, and accountability of PRIs to ensure inclusive development with social justice and efficient delivery of services.
However, in 2014 the NDA Government clubbed together Rural Development, Panchayati Raj and Drinking Water and Sanitation. Today, there are nearly two and a half lakh PRIs at village, block, and district levels in India and nearly 30 lakh elected representatives.
Truly, an ideal democratic set up has taken roots in India and to some degree in some other SAARC countries also – Bangladesh, Nepal, and Pakistan.
Indeed, the history of panchayats has never been smooth. Whereby, it has its ups and downs ever since systematic local administrative organizations were constituted in the late 19th century by the British Government.
Soon after Independence in the 1950s, the three-tier Panchayati Raj was introduced after extensive in-depth studies. Though it did not deliver expected results thanks to political and other causes, massive data created in the 1960s can still provide guidance in our path towards devolution of powers and decentralization of administration.
Outwardly, it might seem that globalization and decentralization are diametrically opposite concepts and cannot go together.  Far from that. Decentralization of governance is an indispensable aid for liberalization.
Importantly, the underlying concept of Panchayati Raj is utilization of local and indigenous knowledge, rural people, popular experience, and open public discussions in decision-making, and transparency in administration of development and welfare schemes.
Economic reforms definitely need to access, assess and act upon popular opinions and reactions at the grassroots to be successful. Moreover, to think of joining global marketing system as something disconnected with local economy and administration betrays ignorance of economics as well as politics.
Unquestionably, local economy is part and parcel of the larger economy — national and global — particularly, in market economy as it determines and is determined by policies that define macro economy.
No doubt, national economic decision-making is centralized and predominantly elite-determined. The decisions are technocratic rather than populist and mostly inaccessible and beyond the comprehension of common people.
In such a scenario, our responsibility is to somehow incorporate and ensure local participation in elite decisions. People cannot be mere receivers of even reforms. And it is here; the well oiled PRIs are of immense use and can play a substantial role.
There is no gainsaying, strong local democracy and rapid economic and social development march together. Imagine for a moment that macro-level decisions are imposed by centralized institutions directly without intermediaries.
This will lead to suspicions and disorder at the grassroots.  To face alien intrusion (in the sense of new ideas and strategies) through global economy,  institutions of decentralized administrative system conducted with people’s participation is needed in both tracks of communication to deliver global message in a form understandable by the people.
And to ascertain and transmit local response to that message.   This will help easy transfer to the new economic order without strain.
Significantly, democracies need the rhetoric of local empowerment and inclusive political institutions more today to carry out the decisions globally made and nationally approved and locally implemented.
We can no longer remain satisfied with plain economic redistribution and poverty alleviation. The new mantra is empowerment and enablement.  The stress must be on rights and not relief.
Further, decentralization alone is capable of protecting the poor and the weak and safeguarding the interests of local area and people. Additionally, several local issues that have to be sorted out while fitting macro and micro economy together, can best be handled by local institutions.
Panchayat members are certainly much closer to people than Parliament MPs physically if not by status. To fulfil their roles and responsibilities, PRIs constituted within the existing political and social system, have to adapt to changes and assume a new role.
Appropriately, it is useful to refer to the concept of “subsidiarity” in the European Law which is based on the concept that “needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them”.
Its organizing principle is that matters have to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.
True, the term “subsidiarity” might not be familiar in India, but its implications are not foreign to Indian Administration well versed in local Government institutions.
Consequently, India’s interest in Panchayati Raj is not any strange idea.  In many countries with diverse economy such as Argentina, Chile, China, Poland, and South Africa autonomy of local units in decision-making is said to have provided a strong viable foundation for economic reforms.
In China, the Town and Village Enterprises (TVEs) were granted wide powers in matters relating to resource mobilization, implementation of reforms etc. South Africa has adopted comprehensive devolution of powers to the third tier.
Therefore, it is time to act on the advice of the Prime Minister.  One of the immediate tasks of the State Governments is to strengthen and reinvigorate PRIs so that they will promote transparent, participatory, and accountable system of governance in the country. (INFA)

Follow our WhatsApp channel