Repositioning the Baeyul (Lost kingdom): A Local Governance Perspective

The government recognized that no development effort can succeed without the people’s cooperation and commitment and effective development cannot take place through a top down process alone. While government would give the lead in the overall direction of development and provide resources and technical inputs which are beyond the capacity of the people, plans will actually be formulated by the people so that these plans reflect the needs of the people and that their execution is within the capabilities of the people. It is the conviction of the government that only when these conditions are fully satisfied and effectively pursued that the benefits of development would actually reach all sections of the population leading to increased equity.

With the revision of the GYT and DYT chathrims, the GYTs and DYTs are being strengthened like never before. The revision of the chathrims will lead to the growth of these local institutions. The local institution involving the people in the decision making process and headed by elected leaders is seen as leading to people empowerment.

However, the decentralization process should not be confused with a means for improving the listening mechanisms for better planning. A distinction, and a choice has to be made clear about empowerment and direction of decentralization and the purposes of listening to the people.

Empowerment occurs when people have:

1. Access to resources like land and credit, services like irrigation, education and health, technologies and marketing facilities
   
2. Control over own situation, institutional development and governance. Ability or right to choose one’s direction and methodology is important. Top down development planning tends to make the beneficiaries dependent on service providers. To really empower people, they must be given the control.
   
3. Capacity: People will need the capacity to manage institutions, organizations, communicate needs and acquire skills, adapt and adopt new technologies.

The revised chathrims have brought about great devolution of powers. It is clear with the drafting of the constitution that taking the decision making powers closer to the people (revised GYT and DYT chathrims) is working towards empowerment and is not only a means of enhancing planning by improving the collection of information about what is needed by the people.

Accountability

The local institutions (GYT and DYT) and the areas within the purview of these institutions would probably over time function without any strong or direct reporting to the line ministries. They would be accountable to the rules and regulations and their constituencies. The leaders elected through a formal electoral process and certified as representatives of the people are not ordinary members of the community with their own axe to grind or with sectional interests. They are elected by the people and since they hold a public office they are expected to serve the interests of the people without any biases towards power structures.

From all that is happening it could be assumed that henceforth the directions set by these peoples representatives is completely in line with the priorities of the people. Though we have shown political maturity, we are treading on fresh ground. This cautions us to be sensitive to the dynamics of tensions that could occur in a system. On the one hand since we are just beginning it gives us the opportunity to be innovative and arrive at a system that is best for us. On the other hand with the wrong assumptions we could face the risk of throwing off track the whole process of institutionalizing a whole system. The best needs to be looked for and a Bhutanese system, which is good, has to be developed. We need to avoid right from the beginning what could be termed as a “decentralization deficit” meaning breaking down of trust between the people and the elected leaders. This so-called “decentralization deficit” can be avoided if a clear process of empowerment is brought about with clear lines of accountability.

The government is clear about the question of accountability (with accountability comes transparency) in the system of governance. The meaning of the term is assumed to be reasonably clear. However, it would do well to keep in mind two types of accountabilities in the context of our decentralization process. Firstly, there is the accountability of the dzongkhag administration who are civil servants to the peoples representatives who have political oversight roles. These civil servants are expected to provide proper information, the accounts of their actions and of the use of government money and the results to the local leaders. The civil servants need to enable the elected representatives make informed decisions based on information and support provided by them.

The other form of accountability is the accountability to the people. This operates through the accountability of the civil servants to the elected representatives and the accountability of the elected representatives to the people through the electoral process.

The focus of decentralization is at the local level (Dzongkhag and Geogs), which have elected leaders leading the local institutions such as the GYT and DYT. These local institutions are accountable to the people or constituencies for the actions. This accountability is established through the influence of the people on the electoral votes, which determines the public offices of the Gups and DYT chairman.

The important factor now is to be clear about these two types of accountability. The failure to bring about these two forms of accountability could result in a “decentralization deficit”.

The local leaders will need to depend on the civil servants for making informed decisions and also for implementation of the plans. This can lead to the idea that the civil servants (dzongkhag administration) must also have greater involvement in decision-making process and that the dzongkhag administration still needs to retain the same discretion. This in turn would lead to the use of this discretion to push forward very strongly what they think is needed by the people. This strong influence could lead to local representatives making decisions that are not in line with the wishes of the people.

The local institutions however, do not function in isolation. They are part of the larger system of governance governed by rules and regulations. These rules and regulations are expressed through several procedures and systems, structures such as the electoral process, reporting procedures, guidance on how to handle local interest groups, means of funding local development plans etc.

These rules and regulations would be framed by the central agencies (preferably by an identified lead agency) based on the legislation, acts or charters passed by the National Assembly.

The link between the center and the people would be the local institutions and the local elected leaders. Since these elected leaders are accountable to the people the interests of the have been given priority. However, being leaders of institutions and having to operate in a larger system where different parts are dependent on the other, it is these people that have to able to balance self-determination of peoples’ interests with that of national unity and cohesion.

The advantage that we have is that these local leaders are members of the National Assembly and would thus have influence on national policies, rules and regulations. They are in a very good position to bring about this balance to avoid this “decentralization deficit”.

It is important that from the onset we set off on this process of institutionalizing local institutions from a common platform where all players have a common understanding of what is to be achieved.

Operationalizing the GYT and DYT Chathrims

1. Common understanding of decentralization process: A clear understanding and direction will need to be established on what is to be achieved and through decentralization and what sort of a support is required from donors. This will enable the government to focus all efforts towards a clear goal. This understanding would act as a guiding principle in the implementation of the decentraliztion policy. (The constitution would give this direction)
2. National Assembly would pass acts and provide guidelines on the process of the decentralization policy. The acts, charters passed by the national Assembly would be acted upon by the ministries in coordination with the Lead Agency
3. Lead Agency: This lead agency would coordinate the overall direction of the decentralization policy. The lead agency would need to lay down clear lines of direction about the decentralization policy. The lead agency should provide an environment for participation and coordinate efforts of the different players towards people’s participation.
4. Line ministries will provide sectoral support based on the area needs of the dzongkhags and geogs. This will be provided in conjunction with the lead agency.
5. Dzongkhag Administration would act as the frontline service providers. They will provide the necessary information, technical support; facilitate identification of issues or services required by the people. A facilitative role will need to be played by them.
6. Dzongkhag Yargye Tshogdu/Geog Yargye Tshogcung act as the link between the people and the service providers. They will be answerable to the people and ensure that the needs of the people are met within the larger national cohesion and unity.

An Operational Framework of the Decentralization Process

Capacity Building

The institutionalization of the GYTs and the DYTs and mechanisms of empowerment would call for various capacity building development efforts. Capacities will need to be developed at he local (dzongkhag and geog) level and the central level. Access and control (two ingredients of empowerment) would not work if people do not have the capacity (the third ingredient) to manage themselves. People need to be properly equipped with the right skills, trained with right technologies, imbibed with the right value systems and educated with the right thinking processes. People as communities must have enhanced capacity to manage themselves through their own structures and processes, organizations, institutions, in groups, as individuals within the larger requirements of national cohesion.

Conclusion

It is important that for decision makers, the civil servants and the people to have a clear view of the direction of the decentralization policy and specifically for the implementers of the decentralization policy to know the importance of the values and needs of the people. There is a need to open up the mindset of all to the political changes and place all institutions and systems, organizations, individuals under increasing and direct pressure to use their available discretion to determine local interests in cohesion with national interests under very clear rules and regulations. A balance has to be struck between national cohesion and self-determination of people’s interest.

“All who got where they are, had to begin where they were”.
Apologies to Robert Louis Stevenson
Keep Moving!