Grassroot democracy in crisis

While the entire country is facing a severe health and financial crisis, Karnataka is on the verge of fostering another. The state government is considering dilution of the principles and purpose of the Panchayat Raj system.

With the gram panchayat (GP) members’ term ending in June-August, the BJP government is keen on postponing the elections to 6,025 GPs keeping the health issue as an excuse. It is favouring nominating members to the GPs.

Extending the term of the present members would be an appropriate ad hoc measure at this juncture. But if the government is not in favour of it for any reason, then a pragmatic approach would be entrusting more authority to the executive at the panchayat level. COVID-19 must teach us quarantine policy and not democracy. Nominating members amounts to a gross dereliction of democratic principles at the grassroot level.

Mahatma Gandhi had said, “a good government is no substitute for self-government.” In the words of famed historian and author John Motley, “Local self-government…is the life-blood of liberty.”

These wise words today are more apposite than ever. With the coronavirus crisis and re-centralisation of power in order to facilitate swift decision making, it is easy for one to forget and undermine the legitimacy and importance accorded to local self-governments. This is especially so in rural areas with Panchayat Raj institutions (PRIs).

At this juncture, let me reiterate the history of and the rationale behind PRIs in Karnataka which is a model to the entire country. The first prominent legislation was enacted in 1959 providing for a three-tier structure. These institutions had limited and sometimes no independent power.

In the 1960s, then Panchayat Raj Minister Ramakrishna Hegde favoured an overhaul of PRIs in order to give them more power and autonomy. At that time, every bill used to be placed before the Congress Legislature Party meeting prior to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly. The bill was not approved by the CLP, due to shortage of a solitary vote. Hegde’s commitment to decentralisation was so strong that he resigned from the ministry.

In 1967, my father P M Nadagouda became rural development and panchayat raj minister. After having studied the nuances of the system, he tabled the bill in the House in 1970. Unfortunately, the government collapsed before the bill could be passed. Through the years, the efforts of these political heavyweights kept the issue of PRIs in the forefront of Karnataka politics.

Hegde’s dream was realised only after more than two decades when he became the chief minister. The concerted efforts of Hegde along with then panchayat raj minister Abdul Nazir Saab fructified in the enactment of a new legislation in 1983 which received presidential assent in 1985.

Thus, the humble beginning of grassroot level democracy in 1959 was given a renewed thrust with the new Act which was passed 1983. The Act provided for 25% reservation for women, reservation for the backward classes, SCs/STs among others.

The Karnataka model was replicated across country by Rajiv Gandhi when he was the prime minister. The three-tier system was given constitutional status with the advent of the 73rd amendment to the Constitution.

The system of local self- governance in Karnataka has emerged as a means by which participative decision-making takes place. Though this system of local self-governance in the state is seen to be a success story, the panchayat system in Karnataka has its fair share of fallacies.

Power groups

Studies by George Mathew from the Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi, has shown that the power in the districts is enjoyed mainly by dominant castes belonging to the top power groups, and the interests of the poor are sacrificed for strengthening the vested interests of the district leadership.

In spite of these pitfalls, the necessity and contribution of the local governance in the state cannot be ignored. These institutions take care of the day to day administration of the local areas by mobilising local resources and by managing the administration of local facilities like drinking water, other sources of water, primary school, cleanliness, primary health etc.

The local bodies in the state have also contributed to planning and implementation of programmes in sectors like agriculture, minor irrigation, animal husbandry, household industries, public works, input supply and their distribution etc.

As a legislator, on many occasions, I have had discussions with Hegde and Abdul Nazir Saab regarding the strengthening of these institutions. The tenets of Gramaswarajya, socialism, social justice, secularism and adequate opportunity for women who form the backbone of the rural household, should be the hallmark of the PR system.

Thus, local bodies have ensured equality of opportunity and bestowed upon our people access to the corridors of power as active stakeholders in decision-making. It is extremely necessary to ensure that this system of local self-governance thrives as they not only strengthen the rural voice but also the rural economy. Accountability of such governments may be increased by introducing Lok Nayak Jayaprakash Narayan’s novel idea of “right to recall” at least at the gram panchayat level to begin with.

Though the tenure of the GPs is getting completed in Karnataka, in the interest of health and safety of our people during the pandemic, elections have to be deferred. The decision of the government to ‘nominate’ members is not only illegal but also serves as a precedent to more such condemnable decisions in the days to come.

(The writer is a former member, Karnataka Legislative Council)