Decentralisation facilitates democracy
Consequently, decentralisation of power and authority as well as formation and promotion of strong local governments have turned out to be the best possible alternatives round the globe. At the same time, it is also agonizingly true that despite official rhetoric, decentralisation can be and is often used a means for recentralisation or reinforcing central control.
Many critics are rightfully convinced that decentralisation in most of the developing countries has been used as a facade to maintain or strengthen in one way or the other the position of those who hold power. Decentralisation may well be used to destroy local or regional centres of power hostile to the national regime, or to incorporate them into the structure of the new state.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. I reckon this practice is very much in practice in Bangladesh and, unfortunately, many decentralisation programs of various regimes have been motivated more by this expediency than other considerations. That democracy is not only electing a party to power to rule a country from the capital is yet to be understood well by both the politicians and the bureaucrats.
Admittedly, there is not yet any viable substitute for effective decentralised bodies for empowering and giving taste of governance to the people, especially for the vast majority that have to stay away from the capital. The tendency to cry out for decentralisation in public and suffocating the sincere efforts in practice is still the order of the day in Bangladesh and most other developing countries.
Though the perennial bureaucratic resistance is the principal culprit in this scam, collusive and docile political leaders cannot deny their share. However, the World Bank very rightly suggests that decentralisation not only contributes to balanced development of various regions in a country, it also greatly contributes to integrity of a state through providing sort of self-power to remote regions. In this sense, the more powerful a country's decentralised bodies, the more strengthened will be its national integrity.
In fact, preceding observations apply to almost every country, not least the big ones, and Bangladesh is, of course, no exception. Moreover, local governments are supposed to be the springboards for prospective and ambitious politicians as in France. The structure of French politics is such that national politics are often geared to attitudes that have their roots at local level. As a result, local elections are keenly contested: a turnout of 75 per cent or 80 per cent is not unusual. Thus, in France, local government is considered as the training ground for national politics.
As summed up by Professor Dr. Tofael Ahmed and Professor Dr. Niaz Ahmed Khan in Banglapaedia, decentralisation scenario in Bangladesh is not encouraging. In their words, evolution of decentralisation in Bangladesh is characterised by: (a) domination by and complete dependence on central/national government; (b) unrepresentative character; (c) grossly inadequate mobilisation of local resources; (d) limited or lack of participation of the rural poor in the decentralised bodies; (e) successive regimes' marginal and superficial commitment to devolution or decentralisation in practice.
In a workshop organised recently by Bangladesh Centre for Communications Program (BCCP) on the role of media in strengthening local government in association with Democratic Local Governance Program (DLGP), USAID and RTI International at CIRDAP auditorium in the city, the speakers called on the government to relax its control over the local government and urged the lawmakers to refrain from interfering in its activities so as to ensure good governance and strengthen democracy.
The discussants in that workshop also called on the government to increase budgetary allocation for the local government institutions, allow them to mobilise their own resources and determine the role of lawmakers with regard to the local government. The speakers opined in the workshop that the media should focus on the activities and problems of these institutions.
Admittedly, civil society organizations and academicians are always crying out for decentralisation and strengthening local governments in Bangladesh. But the preference for centralisation of the bureaucrats and the amenable politicians has so far carried the day pretty well. It is utterly unfortunate that Upazilla level of Bangladesh local government, which has the makings of being a strong local government body, is not being put into operation only because of resistance from the elected lawmakers afraid of losing their supremacy in their respective constituencies.
It is true that if we opt for good governance, we have to carry out democratic decentralisation. We have already lost a lot of time. Thus, not decentralisation as a political stunt, but sustained measures and sincere efforts are overdue in that decentralization, and strong local governments have the potential of making democracy truly functional and meaningful and of facilitating the development agenda and activities of a country, not least Bangladesh.