Local government

Introduction: Local government institutions serve as the foundation

of a democratic polity and as a nursery to train elected
representatives in the responsible management of public affairs. They
also offer the largest possible number of people possibilities of
participation in self-government. But the system has failed miserably
in Pakistan. The basic cause of this failure to establish a durable
system springs from the civil-military relationship in the governing
structure of Pakistan. Whenever a military regime takes power in
Pakistan, local government institutions start flourishing because local
institutions are the only representative institutions and create a
democratic faade in the country. But with the revival of national and
provincial assemblies, the local government institutions set up by a
military regime lose their importance and some new experiment is
initiated to shift the focus of local political support to the parties in
power.
Historical Background:This should be clear from the following
historical account of local bodies in Pakistan.
The first experiment in decentralisation was the Village Agricultural
and Industrial Development Programme (Village Aid) launched in
1954 as a self-help project through an administrative mechanism
rather than as a legally established system of local government.*The
first legally established local government institutions were Ayub
Khans Basic Democracies created through the Basic Democracies
Order of 1959 under which local councillors were elected to
undertake community development projects. In addition, 120,000
councillors elected in both wings of the country also served as the
electoral college for the election of the president in 1964.*The PPP
government elected in 1971 abolished the Basic Democracies system
and passed the Peoples Local Government Ordinance of 1972 but
no elections were held under this Ordinance. Instead an Integrated
Rural Development Programme (IRDP) was launched in 1972.*Gen
Ziaul Haqs martial law regime revived the local government
institutions in 1979 through the Local Government Ordinance of 1979,
under which elections were held in 1979 and 1983 for district, tehsil
and union councils. The chairman of the district council was elected
by the members of the council, but the district was effectively
managed by the deputy commissioner.*The civilian governments from
1985 to 1999 continued the system of local government established

by Gen Ziaul Haq, but channelled most of the resources for

community development through special programmes. These
included Prime Minister Junejos Five-Point Programme (1986-88),
the Peoples Works Programme of Benazir Bhuttos government in
1988-90 and 1994-96 and the Tameer-i-Watan Programme of Nawaz
Sharifs government in 1990-93 and 1997-99.*The martial law
government of Pervez Musharraf, which took over in October 1999,
introduced a more ambitious devolution plan through the Local
Governments Ordinances of 2001 significantly enhancing the
functions and resources as well as the political role of local bodies
elected in 2002 and 2005.*It will thus be seen that all three major
pieces of legislation on the subject, namely the Basic Democracies
Order of 1959, the Local Government Ordinance of 1979 and the
Devolution Plan of 2001, were introduced by military governments to
create their own base of political support.*In Pakistan local institutions
were strengthened at a time when due to prolonged military rule,
provincial autonomy was effectively curtailed. Under martial law, the
executive invariably becomes stronger at the cost of the other two
pillars of the state, namely parliament and the judiciary. This is a
serious structural weakness in our system and has to be addressed
by strengthening parliament and the judiciary before a viable and
sustainable system of local governance can be established in
Pakistan.
Reasons of Failure: The system failed because, firstly, its executive
orders could not be owned by the public and, secondly, it brought the
district administration and the police under elected local governments
sooner than the state system was prepared to absorb the blow.*The
Musharraf regime antagonised the provincial governments by making
the local bodies richer and stronger than them. It also antagonised
the bureaucracy by replacing junior viceroys with plebeians. The
provincial governments want to control the local bodies because they
are not comfortable with elected rivals; they are happier with
bureaucrats who can be easily manipulated or dispensed with.
Opposition to this System: The local government system will
always be under pressure from different interest groups. Currently the
bureaucracy, especially at the provincial level, would like to regain the
position it enjoyed under the 1979 model. Similarly, newly elected
MNAs and MPAs and other elite groups would like local institutions to
be subservient to their respective political interests. There is also the
perception that the 2001 devolution plan was over-designed, whereby

too much has been devolved from the provincial to the local
governments while federal-provincial decentralisation has been totally
ignored. In that context, the proposal to leave only three subjects to
the federal government goes to the other extreme since such a
confederal system could make the federal government totally
powerless to keep the country together.
Essential Criteria:It is important to spell out the main objectives of
devolution as essential criteria on which any devolution plan should
be based:1 The basic philosophy of devolution is based on the
golden concept of subsidiary i.e. whatever can be done at the local
level should not be taken up at the higher tier.2__Decentralisation
increases popular participation in decision-making because it brings
government closer to the people making it more accessible and
knowledgeable about local conditions and more responsive to
peoples demands.3__To ensure that the decentralisation effort is not
hijacked by the local elites and there is broad-based participation of
the people, a strong judiciary and a well-organised civil society is
required.4__Finally, the state has to transfer adequate fiscal
resources to support decentralisation. For these resources to be
utilised effectively, local administrative and institutional capacity has
to be created and performance judged on the basis of well-defined
benchmarks.
Recommendations: The fact that local government is a provincial
subject does not mean that it should become the provincial
governments handmaiden. It is therefore necessary to ensure that
the local bodies are not deprived of their representative character.
Their constitutional status needs to be strengthened and they must
retain the necessary authority, financial and administrative both, to
function as responsible institutions of democratic government.
It is certainly time to abolish the ministries dealing with provincial
subjects , and create a single ministry for provincial coordination. A
lean central government should serve Pakistan better.*There is an
urgent need for all political parties to evolve a consensus to build a
durable and sustainable system of local government and community
development. The most practical approach for evolving such a
consensus would be to make necessary changes in the existing
system of local government rather than create four different systems
in the four provinces.
Role of political parties:Political parties have also indicated their
position with regard to devolution to local governments. There is a

wide range of views on devolution in the manifestos. At one extreme

the MQM, with a strong pro-devolution agenda, calls for further
strengthening of local governments through an integrated system,
with specialised departments being brought under the control of
district administrations.*The PML-Q emphasises devolution as one of
the 5-Ds on which their manifesto is based, and the PML-N calls for
a high-level commission to look at the entire governing structure,
including the devolution/decentralisation process and to suggest
amendments in laws that recognise the ground realities in each
province and are also suited to the needs of the people.*The PPP, in
line with the partys devolution plan, does not support the local
government system introduced by the military regime. The proposed
list of local services identified as local by the PPP is somewhat
restricted and includes education, health, water supply and sanitation.
Conclusion: The political leadership of Pakistan is virtually on trial
since it has to prove to the nation that a democratic system has
greater capacity and political will, than successive military regimes, to
evolve a strong and sustainable system of local governance. To
achieve this paramount long-term objective, they would have to
relegate their respective short-term political objectives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------