Representation in decentralized governance : Country study of Pakistan

by

Sajid Kazmi, Shahbaz Bokhari, Zeb Rifaqat

Sustainable Development Policy Institute

(SDPI)

2006

The overall research question

“In what ways can representation be made more accountable in decentralized local

governance?”

Focus of the study:The instruments available for making elected and administrative officials in local government accountable

History of devolution in Pakistan

• Basic Democracy by Gen. Ayub Khan

• Baldiati Nizam (Local Govt. System) by Gen. Zia

• Devolution Plan by Gen. Musharraf

Why Devolution?

• Inefficiency of the centralized govt. systems

• Inequitable in the provision-of social services, and

• Well being of citizens compromised 

• Crisis of governance

• Lack of responsiveness to the problems of vulnerable groups

Why Devolution?• Sixth National Finance Commission (1997) made

the case for the decentralization of state functions

• The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) makes a similar case for good governance for economic growth and poverty alleviation

 • Others scholars (Shah 1996, 1997, Burki (ed)

1999, Thornton 2000, & Work 1999) also made case for Pakistan to join the international thrust towards decentralization

Stated goals of devolution

• To enable districts to manage themselves more efficiently

• Empowering the people at the grass roots• Provide affordable and speedy justice near the

doorstep• Ensure financial autonomy and equitable

opportunities of livelihood• Enable the people to have a meaningful role in

development

The focal areas of Local Govt. Plan

• State-citizen relations

• Rural-urban divide

• Integration among various tiers of govt.

• Coordination of efforts

Structural and administrative reforms

• Tiers of government

• Previously Now

• Federal Federal

• Provincial Provincial

• Division District

• District Teshil

• UC

•  

 

Current scheme

• Nazim (elected representative) is the executive head of the district

 • DCO (District Coordination Officer), heads the

government administration of the district

 • The district head of police and the DCO report to

the district Nazim

•  

 

Accountability mechanisms

• Monitoring committees

• Citizen Community Boards (CCBs)

• Zila Mohtasib (District Ombudsman)

• District Public Safety Commission

• Musalihat Anjuman (Reconciliation Council)

• Village and Neighbourhood Councils

Methodology

• Desk Study• Focus Group Discussions

– With UC Members (31)– With Women (33)– CCB Members

• Citizen Survey (30 each at 4 UC)• Performance in 2 sectors

– Education– Health

Sampling

• 2 Districts

• 4 Union Councils– One locality with a closely balanced political

party representation

– One locality with a clear dominant political party

Topics discussed during the FGDs

• Reasons to take part in the elections

• Reasons for their success in the elections

• Reasons for failure of their opponents

• Presence and representation of marginalized communities

• Role of political parties in the elections

• Role of Biraderis (Clans)

Topics discussed during the FGDs

• Role of CCBs in the process of development of their UC

• Process of identification of development projects• Factors determining success of development projects• Peoples’ participation in the decision making• Role of female councilors in the uplift of women • Accountability process of the local government

system via representatives• Accountability process of representatives by the

electorate

FGD with females

• Lack of awareness about the system• Motivation to contest election from within the

household• Female councilors had only token presence in the

Union Council• Mobility seen as the major problem• Female councilors were not taken seriously by

their male counterparts• Low level of education• Proxy presence of the female councilors

FGD with CCB members

• Past experience with NGOs

• Involvement in welfare work

• Selected through consultative process

• 20% contribution by community was seen as major hurdle

• Resorting to smart accounting

• Favouritism in allocation of funds

Recommendations

• The system needs fine tuning

• Devolution, not decentralization is required

• CCB and resource capture by local elites should be avoided

• Capacity building of CCBs is needed • 20% Community share is a major hurdle

Recommendations

• Community match the cost by providing labor•  • Allowances to councilors are very modest

• Better coordination b/w representatives and officials

• Timely release of development funds must be ensured

Recommendations

• Role of media for effective campaigns to educate citizens on Devolution Plan

• Direct elections of district and Tehsil Nazims will increase accountability and defuse political pressure