Strengthening the local governments

Masum Billah :
Upazial administration was introduced by Hussain Muhammad Ershad most probably to strengthen the local government bodies and for taking the administration to the door of the common people. It actually witnessed a strengthening role in running the affairs of local government when it was introduced first in the year 1985. When BNP led government assumed power of the state, they abolished the system sensing the conflicting situation between the MPs and Upazilla chairmen though the MPs’ role is to contribute to making laws of the country and Upaziala Chairmen’s function is to look after mostly local development works. But MPs get involved in the local development and other works where power, politics and even monetary benefits are involved. In this sense, BNP probably did the right thing. When a system creates rivalry between the Upazilla chairmen and MPs, it calls for further attention from the authorities concerned. In 1996 AL revised the Upazila system probably with the hope of strengthening local government bodies. But the sad stories of this body have drawn the attention of the nation. The Chairmen and his/her members of the Parishad have been virtually inactive.
If we can caste our eyes back to have an idea of local government administration we learn that in 1976, General Ziaur Rahman promulgated a local government ordinance providing for zila parishad in each district. It said that the parishads shall be composed of elected representatives for a five-year term but no elections have yet been held. Instead, deputy commissioners were appointed ex-officio chairmen of the parishads. Two years after promulgation of the ordinance, the country’s first military ruler amended the constitution through a martial law proclamation to bring back the provision requiring the government to promote local government institutions. It seems interesting both Ziaur Rahman and Ershad came to the politics from the cantonment but they thought of strengthening the local government bodies which our real politicians did not think. Ershad regime held two upazila elections–one in 1985 and the other in 1990. Zila parishads constituted under the act of 1988 worked up to 1990.
When Ershad regime was ousted from the power, the zila parishad chairmen, most of whom were MPs from Ershad’s Jatiya Party, were removed and Deputy Commissioners returned as ex-officio chairmen. The BNP-led government abolished the upazila system shortly after coming to power in 1991. Things did not improve even after reintroduction of the constitutional provisions on local government in 1991.
The zila parishads continued functioning under the act of 1988 during the BNP rule between 1991 and 1996. In 2000, the AL-led government repealed the zila parishad act of 1988 and framed a new law providing for direct election to the parishads. But up till now, no election has been held.
Now let us see the structure of upazila parishad. It consists of a chairman, two vice-chairpersons (one of them a woman), chairmen of all union parishads under the upazila concerned, mayors of all municipalities, if there are any, and women members of the reserved seat. One-third of the total women members from reserved seats of union parishad under an upazila will be the upazila parishad members. The women members of the reserved seat of the union parishad will elect them.
The upazila parishad chairman and vice-chairpersons will have to resign from their party posts if they hold any. The vice-chairpersons will elect a two-member chairman panel within one month of the first meeting of the parishad.
A vice-chairperson from the panel will serve as the chairman if the elected chairman fails to carry out their duty for absence, illness or any other reason.
Upon suggestions of the Local Government Commission, the government can suspend any chairmen, vice-chairpersons and women members temporarily if their work goes against the parishad’s interest or seems “unexpected” from administrative point of view.But, they will be allowed to give their statement before that.Every upazila parishad will have a fund. Government grants, income from local sources, grants from other parishads or local authorities, loans granted by the government, money collected from taxes and fees, and incomes and benefits from schools, hospitals, dispensaries, buildings and organisations run by the parishad will be deposited in the fund.
When AL-led government won the state power again after a questionable election, they tend to revive and revitalize the Upazial Parishad . Accordingly, our Election Commission has announced the schedule of polls for 219 upazilas by fixing February 19 and 27 as poling dates. Election to the remaining upazilas out of the total 487 will be held later in phases. Election means the involvement of huge money, conflict, terrorism, killings . The whole nation has sadly witnessed the cruel and terrorist activities across the country for the last several months. BNP and its allies did not take part in the national election but they have expressed their desire to contest in the Upazila elections which means we should be ready to see more bloodshed.
In spite of all these, the upazila election is seen as a positive development towards strengthening the local government bodies but questions arise whether the elections will be able to make necessary contribution to activating the Upazia system for which it was actually meant.
Our experiences show that the upazial parishads remained dysfunctional with chairman turning almost into lame ducks due to interference by the MPs. After the election in 2009 the Upazila tangle entered a new phase with the chairmen getting locked in a power struggle with Uapzila Nirbahi Officers while their fight against the dominance of MPs continued.
Leaders of Upazila chairmen’s Association alleged that the chairmen have become inactive due to indecision of government and non-cooperation of the UNOs and the lack of legal framework. Why the UNOs don’t want to reactivate the Upazila system? UNOs are civil servants, not public representatives.
They have talent, dedication but latent desire to nurture bureaucracy in the name of implementing decisions of the government but don’t want to see any dominance of local boss or representative. It has some valid reasons also which the people of Bangladesh are quite aware of. Elected people usually remain powerful -both positive and negative powers they hold. They have a group of strong cadres though not in written.
As the UNOs are not the public representatives, they cannot get actively involved in the local development but the elected persons are answerable to the people who vote them. But the people who vie for this post are usually local influential persons and because of their belonging to a particular party they become more powerful and necessarily they get surrounded by the local petty-leaders and influential persons who try to influence any sort of activities in favour of them which they UNOs don’t want. Do we have any mechanism to undo or minimize this situation? If so, the Upazila Parished will accrue benefit for the people. If not, what’s the necessity of it?
Though it’s a local government body, it fully turns into a political rivalry namely between AL and BNP which necessarily and definitely influence the local activities at the cost of common people’s suffering and deprivation of usual things they deserve. Suppose, the BNP led candidates have won in many seats.
Can we expect that they will enjoy all sorts of cooperation from the government to do good to the people of those Upazillas? Our existing democratic practices don’t say that. If the AL led candidates win in the seats, what will happen? Then we can remember the maxim ‘absolute power corrupts anything absolutely’. Who will take action against the corrupt practitioners? Who will hinder ill practices of these powerful people?
The tug of war between the MPs and Upazial Chairemen made this body inactive since the second term of this parishad. The government’s decision not to make a direct liaison between the Upazial chairmen and government has infuriated the chairmen.
So, they asked for cancellation of the law providing that UZ Chairman will contact the government through the local MPs. Besides. They also asked for scrapping the decision that chairmen would have to undertake development scheme in consultation with the local MPs.By accusing the UNOs of non-cooperation the chairmen have made it clear that they want these government officials to be completely subservient to them.
In other words, the chairmen were fighting on two fronts against the MPs and against the UNOs and incidentally both these groups enjoy the tacit support of the government. But the UZ chairmen could not get their demands fulfilled and the upazila parshads remained inoperative over the last five years. The country’s constitution stresses ensuring that the local government bodies are independent and strong. But the upazial parishad Act 2009 does not fulfill this criterion.
A better power game is likely to being between MPs and upazial chairmen over executing power and influence to run local administration and implement plans for economic and social development.
Since majority of population of developing countries live at the local level, structure of the local government bodies should be designed in such a way that these bodies are administered by elected representatives. At the same time, opportunities should be created for participation of local people in the decision making bodies. Involvement of citizens in the political decision making process can be considered as a prerequisite to establish good governance and democracy.
But in this tire local government body both upazila chairmen and UNOs have established themselves as opposed to each other. Such situation is not desirable at all since cooperation of bureaucrats is necessary for realization of government’s, and for that matter people, hopes and aspirations. To establish an effective and public welfare orientated Upazial Parishad , the government needs to minimize the gaps between the two groups.
The efficient bureaucrats must have the opportunity to utilize their talent and potential for the welfare of the people. The public representatives must know to work without putting any political or other sorts of influence which mars the sanctity of the Upazial Parishad. But can we afford to dream this utopian hope?

(Masum Billah is Program Manager: BRAC Eduction Program and Vice-President: Bangladesh English Language Teachers Association ( BELTA), Email: masumbillah65@gmail.com)