Whither devolution?

A marathon meeting of senior bureaucrats from all the four provinces at the National Reconstruction Bureau (NRB) in Islamabad the other day approved a radical set of amendments to the local bodies law. These amendments are likely to be finalised soon and then submitted to President General Pervez Musharraf for approval. Following his approval, the provincial governments will promulgate these amendments through ordinances. The amendments envisage sweeping powers to the provincial chief ministers to remove district/tehsil nazims. They will also enjoy powers to set up inquiry commissions to probe the conduct of a nazim and act on the recommendations of such commissions.
Further amendments propose changing the method of removing a district nazim through a no-confidence motion by making a two-thirds majority necessary rather than the post-devolution simple majority. The method of election of tehsil nazims and district naib nazims will be changed by restricting candidates to members of the respective tehsil and district councils.
This would repeal the earlier arrangement whereby the district and tehsil nazims and naib nazims contested elections as joint candidates. Union Council seats will be reduced from 21 to 14, with four seats for male members, four for workers/peasants/farmers, including one each for women and minorities. This represents a retrogressive step in the area of women's empowerment, a programme the government has been touting loud and long.
The nazims and naib nazims of union councils, however, will continue to contest elections as joint candidates.
Further, district services will be established. A co-ordination committee at the district level with MNAs and MPAs from the district attending, two members from civil society recommended by the leader of the house and leader of the opposition in the district council, two technocrats, one secretary and one chairman, will propose development programmes.
Since the opposition will have just one member in the co-ordination committee, the overwhelming weight of the membership will favour the sitting provincial government. The amendments also propose the district administration be given powers to collect local taxes, and the Auditor General of Pakistan to audit their accounts.
The two-year old row between the NRB and the provinces was finally resolved by agreeing to appoint caretakers instead of administrators to replace district nazims by the end of June, preparatory to holding fresh local bodies elections. These caretakers would be appointed for 60 days immediately after the announcement of the election schedule and would work until replaced by the new elected district nazims.
The caretakers would have no powers of transfer or posting of officials, would not be able to launch any new development scheme and would only look after the day-to-day affairs of the districts. New city governments would be established in Rawalpindi, Gujranwala, Multan, Faisalabad and Hyderabad after the elections, along the lines of those already functioning in Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta.
Several questions arise about these sets of proposals. First and foremost, do the new amendments signal the surrender by NRB chairman Daniyal Aziz to the demands of the provincial governments after resistance lasting two years? Second, why are these amendments to be promulgated through ordinances and not brought before the provincial assemblies for discussion before adoption? It seems strange that the political process of devolution should be refashioned by a meeting of bureaucrats rather than the elected politicians whose brief it should rightly be.
Third, where are the checks and balances to ensure provincial governments do not simply employ their new powers to remove their opponents and install their supporters, with the two-thirds majority subsequently required to remove a district nazim making their installed favourites that much more difficult to remove democratically? Even the President's powers to dissolve the National Assembly, thereby sacking the sitting government under Article 58(2)(b) of the Constitution, and the federal government's power to impose Governor's Rule in any province are limited by checks on the higher authorities' powers and on the duration of such arrangements.
The amendments to the local bodies law, on the other hand, do not seem to envisage any checks or balances to prevent the provincial governments misusing the sweeping powers the amendments intend to confer on them.
Last, but perhaps most tellingly, the entire thrust of the proposed amendments runs counter to the philosophy of devolution. If General Musharraf too, whose pet project devolution was, has surrendered to the exigencies of practical power politics, finding it necessary to keep his allies in the provinces sweet by conceding their demands to control the affairs of the local bodies in direct contradiction of the idea of devolution, then this can only be regarded as a regressive step as far as the introduction and consolidation of grass roots democracy is concerned, a system that still, despite its flaws in practice, offers the best hope of provision of better service to ordinary citizens.
It would be a real pity if the future of the perfectly desirable project of devolution fell victim to the considerations of clinging to office and extending influence of the governments of the day.