Dr. M Abul Kashem Mozumder and Dr. Md. Shairul Mashreque :
Local governance is a part of overall governance (Hye 1998:15). The local government system in Bangladesh operates at three levels: metropolitan, urban and rural-local. The potentials of local governance can be realized when local participation assumes importance in (a) planning and implementation of projects (b) supervision of educational institutions, hospitals and other government financed units (c) mobilization of support for new initiatives like campaign against dowry, child labour etc. (d) enforcement of laws regarding gender discrimination, violence against women, environmental protection (e) mobilization of resources in the form of taxes, fees, tolls etc. (f) holding LG institutions accountable to the community (g) sensitizing the community making it vigilant and active ensuring transparency and responsiveness of LG institutions (Ibid:15).
‘The prospect of governance led local government reveals a strong desire for synchronization of various policies and programs with the coordinated efforts of the stakeholders. It necessitates truly autonomous local governance sufficiently decentralized for conducting a vast area of development activities. It needs to be operative with its own organization resources, funds, field units and various partners of development working in the rural community.
Accountability, transparency, equity, participation and empowerment are essential for strengthening local government (LG) institutions. LG institutions can function efficiently and effectively if the provisions of the constitution and rules of the Acts are duly followed and respected.
The local government system in Bangladesh has evolved within a three-tier framework – union, upazila (thana) and district – first envisioned in the colonial-era Bengal Local Government Act of 1885. This has not meant, however, that an effective three-tier local government system is actually operational. The institution at the primary tier i.e. the Union Parishad (UP), has had the most robust presence by virtue of institutional continuity as an elected body. The body at the secondary level i.e. the Upazila Parishad (UZP) has a much smaller history as an elected body while an elected body at the apex level i.e. district, is yet to appear.
Peasant participation in development to which most attention is directed in recent years is the distributive aspect of rural politics. The locus of decision-making in the peasant community economy is a small coterie of elites consolidating power and wealth in their own hands. The current increasing phenomena of inequality, poverty and pauperization of the peasant in the rural areas of developing nations in general and Bangladesh in particular indicate that existing socio economic and political institutions controlled by the elite structure (ruling structure) are not capable of ensuring equitable or at least fair distribution of benefits of development. These institutions coupled with diverse rural development projects serve the interests of the elite group. The masses of peasants continue to be deprived of their due share in political and economic power.
The organization forms assumed by the ‘institutional arrangement’ can be critical of facilitating or constructing bonafide peasants participation in development and creation of power, position and privileges. The ‘institutional arrangement’ itself is adapted to the prevailing structure of rural economy and society. As Saul says (cited in Bratton 1980:6) “Institutions cannot be viewed or addressed independently of their structure that maintains them and influences their activities.”
Participation not only indicates participation in the development activities of the community itself but also in areas of activity that the people share with other communities. Given the interdependence of the peasant communities under the impact of modernization, the importance of organization in increasing people’s involvement and initiative is admittedly great. The operating organizations in and outside the village include informal political body (traditionally sanctioned) cooperatives, recreational club, youth club, women association, union parishad (grassroots government), various committees, rural courts etc. Many of these organizations involve the participation of people belonging to a number of villages as members. In some organization membership is restricted and in some it is wide ranging. Membership in various committees is closed and limited to the higher echelon of the society. Apart from the upward movement along organizational linkage people participate in various rural development projects as beneficiaries. Some model farmers in South Asian villages have received useful orientation from the rural development institutions as trainees. They are partaking in the activities of the projects as mobilizes and change agents. This level of peasant’s involvement as beneficiaries and trainees in recent years is a manifestation to the tremendous increase of social mobility (Mashreque, 2002).
It should not surprise if the rural development programs have a tilt in favor of the ruling class on whose support they are dependent for their proper implementation. The generic feature of the rural development experimentation is the fact that development activities are biased towards the ruling class whose cooperation is considered a sin-quo-non-for fulfilling the twin objectives of growth and societal integration. As a result the issue of rural poverty, inequality, and exploitation remain sidetracked in reality. In the study areas patronize resources in the rural institutions dominated by the ruling elites are responsible for lopsided participation in development, elite conflict and the lack of growth. Likewise they tend to generate wrath suspicion and discontent among the dispossessed. There has been overlapping of the elites in all decision-making institutions (village council, cooperative, union parishad, and various development committees). They decide upon diverse development issues and grievances maintaining liaison with the development officials who are giving extension and promotional services. In the process of manipulation the proportion of rural elites making use of extension services and obtaining access to other resources of patronize keeps on remaining high. As the distribution of resources meant for development projects is routed through the elites, the cases of corruption and misdistribution are obvious (Mashreque, 2002).
Governance by implications involves input from service oriented promotional activities within the organizational context. It demands an orderly institutional arrangement with built in mechanism providing genesis for social mobilization.
(Dr. M Abul Kashem Mozumder, Pro-VC, BUP and Dr. Md. Shairul Mashreque, Retired Professor, Chittagong University).
