Who’s afraid of local governments?
Upon taking charge, the PML-N government extended the local government system introduced by General (retired) Pervez Musharraf and then replaced nazims with administrators throughout Punjab.
This was not the first six-month extension they have gained to perpetuate this ad hoc system.
If democracy means public participation in government, nothing can be more democratic than local government structures that allow people to participate directly in decisions that affect them.
So why are the provincial governments, including the one in Punjab, so scared of local government elections? Why has legislation for a revamped system of local government not been drawn up, let alone implemented, in the last four years? And why are local governments so important to dictators, with each one from Ayub Khan to Musharraf setting them up?
Political parties and provincial governments see local governments as impediments to their political designs and ambitions.
Establishing a local government means sharing power, and money, at the local level. If there is a district government dominated by the opposition to the Punjab government, the provincial administration will not be able to spend funds where they like, while the district bureaucracy will be divided between the local and provincial governments. No government wants this, because it would curb their power to rule the district and spend money. Hence this evasive legislation.
Meanwhile, in the absence of local government, districts, tehsils and union councils are run by magistrates, assistant commissioners and deputy commissioners, who are direct tools of the provincial government.
The absence of local representation in a district hurts the people who live in that district because they don’t have a direct influence – a vote – on the bureaucrats appointed by the provincial government.
While the provincial governments fear them, military dictators love local government. The reason is legitimacy. A military dictator commands soldiers, tanks and fighter planes, but knows that he does not command the respect of the people.
Engineering a local government system in which representatives have the power to influence local matters gives him the chance to claim democratic credentials. Also, local elections are much easier to rig, as there are fewer voters to influence and no dearth of free loaders and sycophants ready to do the boss’s bidding. Government agencies can vet candidates for loyalty to the dictator.
Once the carefully crafted system of local government is in place, a dictator can tell his subjects and the world that he has introduced a democratic government. With a little legislative jiggery-pokery, the local government representatives can even be turned into an electoral college for the dictator, who can then claim to be the rightfully elected president.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 29th, 2011.
COMMENTS (2)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
The LG system de-centralizes the government structure, thereby, increasing the power of the masses. At a local level, the nazim is chosen from his town, where he has lived long enough fer the people to know him and for him to know the people's issues. If he doesn't perform his duties, he will face a backlash from his very own next-door neighbour. Through his tenure, he will have to meet and greet the people of his town when going to work and on his way back. The system works wonderfully. With a few extra checks and balances, it can be even more efficient. The problem with our country is that we are cursed to fall under the rule of "the wretched beaurocrat club". This club has its exclusive chosen few, who hate sharing power or financial decision-making. One thing common in dictators such as Ayub Khan and Pervez Musharraf is that the economy flourished during both their tenure. consumer items were affordable, their was an industrial boom, the stock market out-performed most of its Asian rivals, investors flocked into Pakistan and there was an over-all improvement in people's livelihood. The common man is least interested in who the CJ is, or weather the economy is artificial or who died in Afghanistan. He has a family to fend for, which is his only priority. Four years of this so-called democracy, with PML(N) in Punjab, and PPP in Sindh, if there's any common man around who is better off, DO let me know, as I am unable to find one. LG system - Power to the people.
Maybe because local government allows leaders to rise up from the massess through the ranks learning politics and picking up support from the people along the way. This nway the party ensures that only its yesmen will get tickets making it an exclusive club dominated by the party boss. It would also permit smaller or new rising parties to enter into areas previously dominated by others.
we cant have that now can we