Decentralization in Pakistan
Theoretical and Historical perspective
Submitted to: Dr. Irum Khalid Submitted by: Muhammad Saqlain
15-Jan-17
Roll no. : 04
Class: Mphil Political Science
Introduction:
Decentralization essentially connotes the division of power and responsibility from higher echelons to the lower tiers. Decentralization invariably increases the power of sub national governments. It empowers to invent new and ingenious way, commensurate with their indigenous needs and vernacular traits. It devolves the power and authority whereby now institutions are flourished under the auspices of system of local governance.
Devolution is a step further than delegation. Delegation may be an arbitrary assignment for an ephemeral period of time to solve the outstanding predicaments; delegation can be withdrawn by the delegated authority in case of abuse or overstepping in the exercise of authority. It can also be declared null and void, if it runs contravene and inconsistent with the constitutional provisions. However, devolution is a legally approved and legitimate mechanism which enjoys the sanction of the constitutional body; it cannot be struck down on whims and fancy.
Different theories postulate different models, keeping in view the prevalent practices. The sequential theory defines decentralization in three main characteristics: one, it envisages decentralization as the process, two, and it take into account the territorial interests of the bargaining actors.[1] It also assimilates and incorporates the policy feed work effects. It conceives the process of decentralization as a chain event, which slowly and imperceptibly unfolds.
Theory of divisional structures suggests that organizational hierarchy can deliver properly when the roles and responsibilities are relatively re-aligned on recurring basis. It assigns different functions and roles as per the accepted parameters. Such division significantly improves the service deliver and yields economic dividends besides social harmony. It also enables the stakeholders to improve the proficiency and plug the loopholes in the system.
Decentralization promotes greater diversity of government services and more opportunities to the citizens to influence the government in the process of decision making; new experiments are launched.[2] Richard Goodish in his magnum opus “Reflections on 1968 Elections” opined that the notion of decentralization empowers the general populace whereby they hold accountable the activities of the state and its functionaries.
It ushers well in the policy payoffs in local government.[3] The input of the local people provides a vantage point to evaluate and formulate the policies as per the public aspirations and longings of citizenry. In system of local government, it is nearly impossible to install a policy that has been dismissed by the local elites and their affiliates, as it will yield unsavory results. An unpopular and largely disapproved policy will inevitably invoke resistance.
Besides when fiscal decentralization is carried out at extensive level, resultantly it is associated with higher level of per capita income, because the economic activities are initiated and resultantly economic growth is accelerated which inevitably paves the way towards prosperity and amelioration.[4] Cartelization of government extravagant expenditures significantly inhibits the intergovernmental competition, because it makes governments more homogenous, monotonous and static. Only the fiscal decentralization seems panacea of the economic woes of the local people. Had decentralization not been occurred the plight of downtrodden people would not have been improved.
Allocation of resources and exploitation of existing resources is ensured with the experiment of local self-government.[5] Hitherto unexplored resources are tapped, the local people are well aware of the treasure trove thus they zealously participate and generate economic activities thereby. Besides this it also circulates the income and avoids concentration of wealth merely to the privileged few.
The theory of fiscal federalism suggests that a system in which pure local government raises pure local taxes and undertakes pure local expenditures with the intervention and meddling of the central government.[6] It significantly bolsters and increases the revenue targets and makes the tax collection an easy task. It enjoys the whole hearted approved of the indigenous people, because they themselves are the architects of that system and therefore readily contribute. It thus triggers the cycle of growth.
The theory of autonomy vis-à-vis decentralization is premised upon two cardinal principles: immunity and initiative.[7] Immunity enables the local tiers to function free from the over-arching and extended oversight of the central government. It enables them to enjoy a functional autonomy, where dictation and influence of the federal state is thwarted and initiatives bolsters the localities to legislate and regulate the behavior of the citizens. It opens new vistas and ingenious ways and means for economic growth and social stability. Thus people invent the ways which can best serve their purpose within the legal framework.
Decentralization has its own flip side; there is always danger of overlapping roles and responsibilities. It results into fragmentation of growth due to multiple local governments and wasteful resource allocation.[8] They insist that it is an extravagant exercise which only adds to complexity of roles and duplicity of work. Thereby it breeds inefficiency and mismanagement.
The adversaries of decentralization also stubbornly insist that it precipitously increases disparities. The economic differences are yawned, which paves the way for social cleavages and foments centrifugal tendencies. It gradually rips apart the social fabric which is neatly and meticulously woven. Besides this it jeopardizes stability; the fruits of decentralization are not evenly distributed rather they are unwisely allocated due to leakages, overspending and under-spending. It also undermines efficiency; the service delivery is not liquidated as it ought to be. There is also apprehension that it will pave the way toward social malaises like corruption and appropriation of resources.
Electoral politics have symbiotic relationship with the application and success of local government experience.[9] It is an established fact that if local self-governance beings the deterioration of civic culture and decline in the social capital. Therefore, the grass root democracy is still at the electoral stage and yet not properly matured. It necessitates further consolidation so as to firmly establish itself. It will not naive to expect that it can yield its result overnight or instantaneously. It is a gradual process, which is evolved by and by. Any endeavor to install a system, where people are not accustomed to, is always an exercise in futility.
The foreseeable future unequivocally anticipates that local government is inching toward local governance where it will have adequate autonomy for functional responsibilities.[10] It will have its own domain and sphere of influence, which will be operated without any intervention. The centralized tenets of federalism, which are authoritarian in nature, will be liquidated and thereby the domain and realm of local bodies will be enlarged. This paradigm shift will be brought by many internal and external factors. The external factors include increasing economic interdepence, process of ever increasing and proliferating globalization and changing technologies with their ubiquitous usage and across the board application. Nonetheless, internal factors are also partly responsible behind this ensuring phenomenon; these include privatization of state services, restricting of local system of governance and changing inter-governmental relations. Due to these factors the system of local self-governance is creating its relevance and flourishing.
The logic behind this sanguinity is grounded in reality; it is an evident truth that human resource management is best undertaken in local system of governance. Only local self governance carves a niche for local electorates and their so-called spokesmen to have a say in the system. The Westphalia model of state with strict demarcation of boundaries and rigidly defined role is depleting fast and being replaced by loose federation and extended autonomy with local system of governance. Therefore the future of local self governance is promising.
Due to ever growing complexity and ever increasing population, power and authority can be exercised effectively when it is derived to the local tiers. Excessive concentration invariably leads towards abuse of power. The notion of local government hammered into existence so as to ensure transparency, efficiency and prompt service delivery. Local government experiment entails diversified objectives, but the touchstone is the expedition’s service delivery without undue and unnecessary delay.
Local government ensures proper safeguards against the despotic predilections and arbitrary exercise of power by the public servants. Lord Auction opined, “Power corrupts everybody and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Therefore, it is a considered opinion that of one who is invested with power is very likely to abuse it. The experiment of local government effectively bulwarks such tendencies. The public servants are held accountable to their deeds and actions. They cannot work on their wishes and fancies rather they are obliged to follow the prescribed rules and laid down procedures. The system of accountability checks these temptations.
Besides this, the conception of local government also carries broad-based and larger public participation. The masses directly participate in the state affairs. It enriches the ownership vis-à-vis state; they zealously participate in the administration of affairs. Greater public participation is also instrumental in the achievement of the targets. As the problems and challenges that crop up are indigenous in nature; therefore a vernacular and localized remedy will be more suitable. Thus public participation brings harmonious relationship between citizens and the state functionaries.
Political consciousness among the citizens is infused through local body system. The electorates are trained when they exercise their right of franchise; likewise it acts as a budding nursery for the future politicians. The counselors attain the mandatory training is the process of electioneering at the local level, and then they aspire for higher offices. Punjab have witnessed plethora of instances, when local leaders transform into national leaders; it drastically changed their stature. Thereby it evolves mature, equipped and seasoned politicians.
Local bodies also harbinger speedy and expeditious redressal of grievances at the grass root level. The localized issues are dealt at local level; the complainants can reach to the concerned quarter without any hindrance. The work is judiciously shared and all the factors are taken into account.
Local government, ipso facto, results into better policy formulation at national level; only the mature politicians will be longing for the slot at national level. Those who are carried away by ravenous appetite of power and authority will not go beyond the politics of municipality. Thus policy level talks, which essentially, calls for deliberation and accruement is exclusively undertaken by mature and seasoned politicians.
Besides this it augers well in financial stability; local taxes are levied, and cesses also contribute in the overall revenue generation. Collectively, the collection of tax gives financial stability. Local system of governance is a cardinal feature of the good governance. Governance, in true sense, necessitates devolution and delegation of power and authority in political, administrative and fiscal terms. It allows a nation to experiment with public progression, on a limited pilot basis to accurately gauge that which work is undertaken at a broader level.
The local system of governance acts as a change agent for social transformation; it does not chip away the long established values, tradition and customs, but rather it will graft new ethos of progress and development, where the rustic and regressive practice will wither away. The society, by and large, assimilates new ideas with seemingly intractable challenges at local level. Thus it shapes the contours of the society.
Local system of governance commences the beginning of development work with proper supervision, over hauling, monitoring and vigilant surveillance of the indigenous people. The areas of less attention and least importance also manage to receive due share. As the indigenous people partake in these endeavors, therefore they are well conversant of the needs and also mindful of the challenges. Though at times the developmental work is orchestrated and engineered keeping in view the parochial political needs. However, it is not consumed in the cold storage of the bureaucracy.
Another hallmark and distinctive feature of the local government system is that it ushers close co-operation between public servants and the common masses, relegating the erstwhile colonial practices to the back burner. The ordinary citizen feels that they have say in the system, and they are responsible to shape the system. They actively participate in the affairs, by plugging the loop holes and enhancing the capabilities. This sense of ownership significantly enhances the trust; resultantly the cause of national integration and nation hood is strengthened.
The accountability system is far better in this system; it is subjected to dual accountability; the elected representatives examine the utilization of funds closely and sharply. Similarly, the public accountability system also works on parallel lines. It produces more transparency and effective and proper management of the resources.
The study of existing stock of knowledge is sine qua non to understand the varied aspects of the underlying problem. The literature review enables the researcher to delve deep and understand the raison de etre. It helps the researcher to contribute in the realm of knowledge while following his predecessors. With this the gaps in the study are identified, and the researcher devotes his attention to focus on these areas. The study of literature review enables the researchers to explore new dimensions and discover new vistas in the realm of knowledge. In a nutshell, the study of literature review is essential for the justification of the research.
The history of Pakistan bespeaks that the non-democratic regimes have been eagerly enthusiastic in the experiment of local system of governance. These regimes had their own axe to grind than their manifest claims of devolution of power: they wanted to seek political legitimacy so as to expand their political clout. On the other hand, the democratic regimes have been shying away from this experiment throughout political history of Pakistan. Local government is, in fact, the logical collar of the democratic dispensation; but they political governments fall prey to the political expediencies and relegate this issue to the back burner.
Local government is a phenomenon that has gained currency in the modern political age; in this era the centrist tendencies have been declared redundant. The essence of democracy is reflected when power and authority is devolved at grass-roots level. In Pakistan different experiments of local government have been conducted. Each aimed at political legitimacy. But Mushrraf’s devolution scheme was launched after a laborious work of deliberation. It ostensibly viewed as an attempt to redefine the existing structure, and bring about structural changes in the existing institutional arrangements. This adventure left a series of impacts on the political, administrative and social culture of the polity.