KARNATAKA - of Planning Commission

Institutional Reforms for Human Development: Panchayat RajThe gram sabha wasconceived as a spacethat provided anopportunity to the peopleto voice their needs andaspirations; it was also tobe a platform where theelected representativesand the bureaucrats weremade accountable to thepeople for their actionsand to serve as a meansof ensuring transparencyin administration.to use the forum to (i) discuss and review alldevelopment problems and programmes of thevillage; (ii) select benefi ciaries for benefi ciaryoriented programmes; and (iii) plan for thedevelopment of the village economy and itspeople which included minimum needs, welfareand production oriented activities. The gramsabha was conceived as a space that provided anopportunity to the people to voice their needs andaspirations; it was also to be a platform wherethe elected representatives and the bureaucratswere made accountable to the people for theiractions and to serve as a means of ensuringtransparency in administration.The decentralised system that was put in placeunder the 1983 Act was really radical, in thesense, that many powers were devolved to thepeople to govern themselves and to promotelocal development. It made the PR bureaucracyaccountable to the people’s representatives,rather than the state bureaucracy. Therewas substantial reservation for women andbackward classes. People’s participation in localgovernment was enabled by holding gram sabhas,which were mandatorily convened twice a year.Here the citizens reviewed the activities of themandal governments, selected the benefi ciariesunder various anti-poverty programmes anddevelopment projects, and made decisionsabout project selection and communityparticipation.Studies on the performance of these PRIs,identifi ed certain shortcomings. While thereservation policy gave women, the ScheduledCastes and Scheduled Tribes and backwardcastes representation in local bodies, they did notoccupy positions of leadership such as Pradhan inthe mandal panchayat or Adhyaksha of the zillaparishad. Members of the dominant communitieswrested these positions due to their control ofrural society (Amal Ray and K. Jayalakshmi,October, 1987; A. Aziz, 1994). Second, with theassigning of the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana fundsand with improved revenue collections the PRIs’fi nancial status improved, but they still sufferedfrom lack of fi nancial autonomy because theycontinued to depend overwhelmingly on grantsfrom the state government. The quantum ofdiscretionary grants available to them wasminimal. Third, the panchayats did better insome areas than in others. The evaluationcommittee which reviewed the performance ofPRIs testifi ed to the good performance of PRIs,(Government of Karnataka, 1989) whereasother studies showed that most of the projectsimplemented were construction oriented; i.e. theconstruction of, and repairs to, buildings, roads,bridges, rather than production oriented (A. Aziz,1993; A. Aziz, 1994; and Planning Department,Government of Karnataka, 1987). Finally,the PR bodies did not have any constitutionalsafeguards or permanence. Consequently, withthe completion of the fi rst fi ve-year term inJanuary 1992, elections to these institutionswere not held; instead, they were supersededand administrators appointed to carry out thefunctions of the PRIs. The 73rd Amendment tothe Constitution gave constitutional guaranteesto PRIs of elections, guarantees against the statesuperseding Panchayat Raj (PR) bodies, seatand authority position reservation for the weakersections, fi nancial devolution on a scientifi c basis,and so on. Following this, many states, includingKarnataka, passed new Panchayat Raj Actsconforming to the provisions of the ConstitutionAmendment Act.The current scenarioAttempts have been made in recent timesto strengthen PRIs by adopting measures topromote good governance and accountabilitythrough ‘enhanced people’s participation, citizenorientation, responsiveness, improved servicedelivery, improved fi nancial management andgreater downward accountability’ (RDPR,Government of Karnataka, 17.5.2004). TheKarnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 was amendedin October 2003 and the 47 amendments thuseffected were intended to facilitate people’sparticipation and to make PRIs more accountableto their constituents. Conceptually, gram sabhasprovide a space for grassroots participation. Inreality, their functioning has often been neitherdemocratic nor participatory. The poor, women,the SCs and STs remained marginalised andvoiceless.256