<p class="bodytext">The governance of India’s technology capital has long been in a state of suspended animation. The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), formed in 2007 by merging the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) with surrounding municipalities and villages, was envisaged as a single, representative civic body to meet the demands of a booming metropolis. Yet, in 18 years of its existence, elections have been held only twice: in 2010 and 2015. The term of the last council ended in September 2020, and for the past five years, Bengaluru has been run by bureaucrats, not elected representatives. Successive governments have hidden behind the excuse of administrative restructuring to postpone polls. With the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) now operational, that fig leaf no longer exists. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that elections to municipal bodies are not optional. In multiple rulings, the Court has underlined that Article 243U of the Constitution makes it mandatory for elections to be held before the expiry of the council’s term. It also made clear that neither restructuring nor delimitation can be cited to delay them. By denying citizens the right to elect their representatives, the government is effectively disenfranchising the people of Bengaluru.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The GBA model, on paper, has its merits. Dividing the city into five corporations and bringing key parastatal agencies like BWSSB and BESCOM under one framework could ensure better coordination and decentralisation. However, the structure also has a glaring flaw as the Chief Minister now becomes the de facto mayor. This centralises authority and risks reducing corporators and mayors, the real custodians of local governance, to token players. MPs and MLAs already have defined roles in Parliament and the legislature, and their presence in the GBA should not come at the expense of elected city representatives.</p>.Goodbye BBMP, hello Greater Bengaluru Authority: City to get 5 corporations from today.<p class="bodytext">It is no surprise that many legislators are less than enthusiastic about holding the civic polls. A functioning council would curtail the extraordinary control they have over civic decisions and developmental projects. But this is precisely the point: democracy is meant to distribute power, not hoard it. Local self-governance is not a privilege to be dispensed with political convenience; it is a constitutional right and bedrock of urban democracy. Bengaluru citizens deserve a transparent, responsive, and accountable civic body that reflects their voice – not an administration perpetually run by bureaucrats. The government must announce the poll dates at the earliest and honour both the letter and spirit of the Constitution. As a global city with soaring aspirations, Bengaluru cannot afford to be governed in a democratic vacuum any longer.</p>
<p class="bodytext">The governance of India’s technology capital has long been in a state of suspended animation. The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), formed in 2007 by merging the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) with surrounding municipalities and villages, was envisaged as a single, representative civic body to meet the demands of a booming metropolis. Yet, in 18 years of its existence, elections have been held only twice: in 2010 and 2015. The term of the last council ended in September 2020, and for the past five years, Bengaluru has been run by bureaucrats, not elected representatives. Successive governments have hidden behind the excuse of administrative restructuring to postpone polls. With the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) now operational, that fig leaf no longer exists. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that elections to municipal bodies are not optional. In multiple rulings, the Court has underlined that Article 243U of the Constitution makes it mandatory for elections to be held before the expiry of the council’s term. It also made clear that neither restructuring nor delimitation can be cited to delay them. By denying citizens the right to elect their representatives, the government is effectively disenfranchising the people of Bengaluru.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The GBA model, on paper, has its merits. Dividing the city into five corporations and bringing key parastatal agencies like BWSSB and BESCOM under one framework could ensure better coordination and decentralisation. However, the structure also has a glaring flaw as the Chief Minister now becomes the de facto mayor. This centralises authority and risks reducing corporators and mayors, the real custodians of local governance, to token players. MPs and MLAs already have defined roles in Parliament and the legislature, and their presence in the GBA should not come at the expense of elected city representatives.</p>.Goodbye BBMP, hello Greater Bengaluru Authority: City to get 5 corporations from today.<p class="bodytext">It is no surprise that many legislators are less than enthusiastic about holding the civic polls. A functioning council would curtail the extraordinary control they have over civic decisions and developmental projects. But this is precisely the point: democracy is meant to distribute power, not hoard it. Local self-governance is not a privilege to be dispensed with political convenience; it is a constitutional right and bedrock of urban democracy. Bengaluru citizens deserve a transparent, responsive, and accountable civic body that reflects their voice – not an administration perpetually run by bureaucrats. The government must announce the poll dates at the earliest and honour both the letter and spirit of the Constitution. As a global city with soaring aspirations, Bengaluru cannot afford to be governed in a democratic vacuum any longer.</p>
