Photo:Fazley Elahi/ Drik NewsNotice: Undefined index: pageID in /var/www/archive/newDesign/print_news.php on line 301
BANGLADESH has previously experienced the unrealistic futile exercise of a top-down planning as well as administrative approaches that reinforced the elite and in turn failed to bring about any qualitative changes in the lifestyle of the majority, particularly in the rural areas.
Theses planning must be decentralised to the extent that allows local communities to set up their own targets and plan production and distribution to achieve those targets.
Decentralisation is a strategy of administrative reform aimed at increasing the decision-making capacity and effectiveness of local bodies/administration for development through the redistribution of powers and resources between administrative levels.
Keeping this in mind the upazila system introduced in 1982, having de-concentrated administration and devolution of authority at its objectives, opened up opportunities for development with a growing awareness and interest in local level planning. It also opened up new opportunities for development at the village level through various government and non-government efforts that drew local programmes and for their implementation involving the people of the grass root level.
For the purpose of local level planning, the upazila system has specific objectives of (a) reducing dependency of the rural people on the national government in order to meet the needs that can be addressed locally; developing self-reliance in the process (b) mobilise and utilise local untapped resources and (c) directly involve the local government in the planning and implementation of these projects.
These are hardly realised till to date. Regarding the role of upazila in planning local resource mobilisation and in organising local level planning, it is also far from satisfactory. Presently the upazilas act slightly more than central government agencies, the local level planning mechanism is virtually non-existent and has not affected the relationship between the local institutions and the villagers as far as their involvement is concerned.
The upazila parishad stands on its own as the basic unit in the development structure of the country considered in politics, administrative set up and in the socio-cultural context of our society.
The main functions of upazila parishad are:
I. To prepare development plans,
II. To implement all the transferred activities of the government,
III. To coordinate and monitor all the departments entrusted to the upazila,
IV. To conduct, repair and maintain the feeder roads,
V. To ensure the services of primary health, nutrition and family planning,
VI. To take necessary steps for supplying pure drinking water to the people of the locality,
VII. To facilitate and take necessary programmes for the welfare of the people and etc.
But the upazila could not perform its functions due to the lack of delegation of authority (autonomy), centrally controlled administration and planning and direct interference of bureaucrats and law makers.
In order to make upazila parishad more effective, the government has already deputed all government officers including Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO) and Assistant Commissioner and other staff at upazila dealing with the transferred subjects to the respective upazila parishad. The UNO is supposed to assist the upazila chairman in implementing the government policies and preparing integrated development plan for the upazila along with control revenue and budget administration.
In practice the field bureaucracy is dependent on central bureaucracy, which develops a sense of belonging to the centre rather than towards the decentralised field institutions. They usually don't cooperate with the elected chairman of upazila and other members of the parishad. As a result a strong field bureaucracy is constituted which fails to operate upazila parishad effectively.
The upazila system is perceived to have taken away the energy of union parishad, which now looks up to upazila parishad for funds. There is a feeling that in the name of decentralised framework of local administration, planning and development, the opposite of what has been professed, has been practised.
The government has adequate degree of regulatory control over the budget of upazila parishad. There is strong evidence of lack of financial discipline and accountability. Besides, the government also retains overriding control over activities of upazila parishads. Through issuance of plethora of directives, circulars etc. upazila parishads have been reduced as mere extension of the central government to executive activities at the local level.
The bureaucratic structure of the upazila administration became the linking annex of the central bureaucracy through the district bureaucracy by upazila and downward mobility of the instructions and guidance. So it is obvious that if government officials had to receive decision from above on day-to-day administrative matter, no real decentralisation could be said to have taken place at the local level. Perhaps, one of the most sensitive areas of governmental intervention is designing a working relationship between centrally organised bureaucracy and the upazila parishad.
The issue of position and power of the upazila parishad chairman is gaining prominence in the administrative arena of the country. This conflict started after parliamentary election of 2008.
The main question also lies: Who has the real power, the chairman or the member of the parliament (both of whom represent the same area)? This potential problem is an issue of debate. The central government has been dictating all the aspects of the upazila through the bureaucrats. The chairman of upazila has been given the status but they are not satisfied with this status and demanding high status on the plea that they are representative of people.
The main obstacle of effective local government body is the supremacy of bureaucracy over the local government. A section of bureaucrats intentionally prolong the dispute centring the local government body to serve its own interest. Upazila Parishad election is a significant achievement of the present government but bureaucratic complexity has made the body ineffective.
The upazila chairman should act as an Executive Chief of the upazila in respect of administration, planning and development activities to perform its function properly. Thus the government should take necessary measures to free upazila parishad from the clutches of bureaucrats. Meaningful decentralisation of administrative power and development activities at the upazila level is the need of the hour to achieve an overall development.
The writer is a Joint Chief, (PRL), Planning Commission.
Email: dr.abdullah.bd@gmail.com
