In today's editorial, the Kathmandu Post raised an important issue of polity-led corruption at the local level (i.e. district, village, and municipality level); and various proposals coming in to address this problem. Corruption has always been a big bottleneck in Nepal's development struggle which has only increased after the devolution of local elected bodies in 2002 by the Sher Bahadur Deuba Government. Local level election has not been able to take place since the last 13 years thus seriously undermining local democratic governance. This rightly appears to be the major concern of Nepalese people on Himalmedia's nationwide public opinion survey in May 2011 (http://www.nepalitimes.com.np/issue/2011/05/13/ByTheWay/18193).
As indicated in the Post's editorial (see below), local level elections are not possible anytime soon as the country hasn't drafted constitution yet. Therefore some kinds of alternative provisions must be established by replacing or re-structuring the all party mechanism (instituted in 2006)- a widely corrupted mechanism- which is responsible for budget disbursement decisions at the local level. The proposal put forward by local development minister Urmila Aryal- seven member council represented by all party representatives according to the share of votes they received in 2008 constitutional assembly election- is a good initiative. Such organizational structure may help the Councils to be a bit more responsible for public as the dominant party representatives will be at peoples' target if things go wrong. But as noted in the Post's editorial, there is not much room to be fully optimistic if the Councils will function accountably and corruption-free (see explanations in editorial piece below).
While a more rigorous debate should continue on this before finalizing a certain mechanism, I think one component will be crucial for the proposal Councils' effective functioning. That is public consultation and feedback system. This component seems to be missing in current proposals and in the debates of local institution. What I meant by public consultation and feedback system is: at every local council level there must be regular consultation meetings-- like a townhall meeting-- inviting all community members to share and update Council's plans and activities, and receive peoples' feedback. Such townhall meetings could be done once in a three month (or as appropriate) by informing all local stakeholders (public, NGOs, businesses etc)in advance. Especial efforts should be given to ensure that local stakeholders, including women, minorities, and vulnerable populations are aware about the meetings, its processes, and importance of their participation in such meetings.
Peoples' consultation and feedback system becomes critical for transparent functioning of public institutions, particularly the ones like local council as proposed by Minister Aryal. The Councils will be forced to remain accountable to their local constituencies when they have to face local communities, answer their questions, and consult and incorporate their feedback from a collective venue on a regular basis. This process will help local communities to take charge of the matters that are of their interest by not completely relying on the Council. This will build a basis for a strong democratic governance at the local level. This foundation will also provide a much needed local level organizational structure for an accountable democratic governance when Nepal is able to have local election in next few years.
*******************
JUN 26, 2011 (Kathmandu Post Editorial)
It has by now become abundantly clear that there are major dysfunctions in the operation of local bodies—DDCs, VDCs and municipalities. In particular, the all-party mechanisms constituted after 2006, where in the absence of elected local bodies, committees consisting of members of all political parties in the area are responsible for taking decisions on the disbursement of funding, have been shown to be greatly prone to major corruption. Funds distributed from the centre are often treated by the political parties at the local levels as resources to be distributed among themselves and to party supporters. As parties command substantial power, there is not much that the local officials from the Ministry of Local Development can do about this state of affairs.
All this, of course, has been recognised for a few years now. It is also recognised that local elections will, by putting in place elected representatives accountable to their populations, contribute towards improving this state of affairs. But it is also recognised that it will be years before elections are held and that other remedies are required in the interregnum. The Ministry of Local Development had floated some proposals last year that appear to have been entirely disregarded by the government. Now the Local Development Minister Urmila Aryal has come up with a new proposal, the gist of which appears to be that the all-party mechanisms should be replaced with a seven-member representative council on which each party will receive representation according to their share of the vote in the 2008 CA elections. The objective appears to be granting parties with a larger mandate, a larger role in local governance. The reasoning goes like this: Tasked with a larger mandate, the parties will assume greater responsibility, development funds will be better spent and corruption will decline.
While the intentions behind Minister Aryal’s proposals are welcome, let us not be too optimistic that, even if implemented, they will lead to a major change in the existing state of affairs. Corruption in local bodies has become too endemic for such a limited change to control. Measures that hold political party representatives accountable for the money they disburse and provisions for investigation and prosecution is what is required. There is currently no legal provision that can hold local party representatives to account; it is government bureaucrats at the local level who bear legal responsibility for any corruption that takes place. Further, corruption will continue to flourish as long as local party leaders possess the patronage and support of their leaders in Kathmandu. It is an open secret that the corruption in local bodies often occurs in collusion with top political party leaders in Kathmandu. Besides firm measures and strong institutions that are able to hold local party leaders to account, then, what is required is an overhaul in the attitudes of top-level leaders towards public funds. Local governance will continue to be dismal unless this happens (http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2011/06/26/editorial/back-to-basics/223325.html).
