Monopolistic control of levers of state power being a basic instinct of our rulers, both elected and unelected, the devolution of power from the federal and provincial governments to the grassroots is invariably grudged by the governments of the day. If at all they agree to hand over some of the controls to the third tier of administration called local government, it is done half-heartedly. This is not only in contradiction to what the election manifestoes of the parties who come to power but also a clear violation of Constitution. Its Article 32 envisages that the state "shall" encourage local government institutions composed of elected representatives of the areas concerned and "in such institutions special representation will be given to peasants, workers and women". And, Article 140A commands "Each province shall, by law, establish a local government system and devolve political, administrative and financial responsibility and authority to the elected representatives of the local government". And for that to happen the said constitutional command has been further clarified by the 18th Amendment which obligates the Election Commission of Pakistan to hold local government elections.
This was not being done, thereby earning a stinging rebuke of the Supreme Court. In his observation during the hearing of the law and order situation in Balochistan on Wednesday, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said the court is of the opinion that 'for want of network at the grassroots level, it is difficult to establish contact with citizens living in far-flung areas, and it is the need of the hour as well as constitutional commitment in terms of Articles 32 and 140A to hold local government elections". Local government is a face to face democracy, unlike the other two tiers of administration where elected representatives generally remain absent - physically and mentally. Given the cantonment boards have decided to hold LB elections on September 15 the court would "appreciate" if the provincial governments and the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) administration should also consider following suit on that date or around that time. Since the governments failed to come up with a firm commitment the court has now directed that elections for local government should be held by 15th September. Will the provincial governments persist in their denial, as they have for last five years? Hopefully no since cantonment boards would be holding election within the period as ordered by the court.
The question is why there is a kind of institutional hesitation on the part of the provinces not to go for local governments. The answer lies in the mindset the powers that be at provincial capitals have inherited from their colonial past. It was so easy for the colonial rulers to have their proxies at the grassroots levels and control them through district administrations. It's no surprise then that the non-representative military governments of Pakistan promoted local governments, but more as a 'competing tier of patronage' than empowering people at the grassroots. So, even when local government systems flourished the conditions conducive to prompt delivery of public services at the doorsteps of people could not be obtained. The villain of the piece was the district bureaucracy - which remains stuck to that monopoly now that we have elected governments in the provinces. The rulers at the provincial levels are fully sold out to the bureaucratic mind not to surrender administrative and financial powers that are so much necessary for political clout to district-level leaderships. Therefore, over the last couple of months, the governments have come up with a variety of excuses not to go for the LB polls. For instance, the Punjab government, even when, as the CJP noted, same party is in power for the last five years the government has yet to come up with 'appropriate' amendments to the local government law. Then it is also not pondering over the issue whether to have the LB elections on party basis or non-party basis - mainly driven by the apprehension that the said polls may throw up independent administrations not loyal to the party leadership. Similar political considerations dominate the approach of other provincial governments. But all this fuss is costing the people dearly. Unlike many other functioning democracies where people seek out their local leaders to secure prompt delivery of services in areas of their immediate interest like education, health, sanitation, policing, etc, here in our country it's just not happening. You elect the member to parliament or the provincial assembly and forget it for the next five years. But that's not the case with the LB system where elected representatives are held accountable on day-to-day basis.