Accountability mechanisms in local governments in Kerala

Background
Decentralisation is an attempt to deepen democracy. It is an attempt to make efficient, effective, transparent and accountable governance at the grassroots. So establishing accountability measures is an essential pre-requisite in any decentralisation effort every where.

An experiment on decentralisation has been going on in the Indian state of Kerala for the past decade. The tiny stretch of land Kerala, having an area of 38,863sq KM and population of 3.18 crores, is divided into three levels of local governments with 999 Grama Panchayats at the grassroots level, 152 Block Panchayats at the intermediate tier and 14 District Panchayats at the district level, in rural areas and 53 Municipalities and 5 Corporations, in urban areas.

Emerging scene of local governance

Local governments, established in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of India, are expected to function as “institution of self government” with a mandate to prepare plans and implement schemes for economic development and social justice. Local governments need to be more accountable to the people in exercise of their mandates and to bring in a more meaningful, dynamic and intensified democratic polity at the grassroots. Accountability is the cornerstone of the new local government system in Kerala and is embedded in multitudes of provisions relating to local governance. There has been little disagreement on the perspectives or need to ensure accountability measures. So the Government of Kerala has been engaged in establishing legal, regulatory and participatory mechanisms in local governments in the State in order to enhance the degree of accountability.

During the past decade, each local government in Kerala has been subjected to an unprecedented series of measures aimed at changing its powers, its financial health, the way it operates and the wide-ranging developmental activities it undertakes. The Government of Kerala has devolved enormous funds, functions and functionaries to local governments and the quantum of devolution would be much more than any other state in the country had done. Kerala has been engaged in many pioneering efforts towards enacting legislation, establishing regulatory measures and institutionalising the process of decentralization during the last decade. Ensuring multi-directional accountability in local governments through various means is part of a series of pioneering efforts initiated for evolving a fairly meaningful decentralised local government system in Kerala. Laying down systems and procedures for incorporating components of accountability was the difficult task the promoters of decentralisation in Kerala had to undertake in the initial phase of decentralisation.

The purpose of this paper is to examine those accountability mechanisms existing in the local governence scenario in Kerla. Such an examination would help in bringing good governance in the local goverments

What is accountability?
Accountability is defined as the state or responsibility of being required to give an explanation for ones action or inaction. Accountability refers to answerability of the public officials or institutions to the public for the action or inaction by them. Accountability refers to the existence of mechanisms, which ensure appointed officials and elected functionaries answerable for their actions and use of public resources. Accountability is an essential component of the broader strategy of 'good governance'.

Accountability pre-supposes rule of law, fair play or propriety in financial responsibilities and absence of illegitimate actions, arbitrariness or partiality. Essentially it refers to fair, honest and equitable exercise of power in accordance with long standing cannons of law The purpose of accountability is to create virtues in public governance and to reduce malfeasance. Accountable government reposes trust of the people it govern and such a government cannot engage in misappropriation or misuse of public funds, rent seeking, abuse of power or dishonesty, as they are mere trustees of the public resources. The inevitable multiplicity of demands that may arise from segregated voters in a plural democratic local government system, need to be decided in a democratic manner and never be decided in an arbitrary manner, so as to make the governance accountable to the people whom they serve. Accountable government is obliged to remain responsive to the needs, wishes and expectations of the people and is expected to show increased effectiveness and efficiency in implementation of its programmes and projects. But it is a sad story that the normative principles of accountability and the manifestation of it lie wide apart in Kerala too.

Accountability of the elected council
The elected council namely Panchayat / municipality is the supreme decision making body in a local government in Kerala. The elected council has accountability to the people for the legitimate democratic power emanating from the people on one hand and to the State and Central government on the other, for funds, for policy implementation and for creation of enabling environment for furthering decentralisation. Historically the elected representatives who constitute the decision makers in Panchayat/municipality are not pre-disposed towards being answerable for their actions. But many institutional structures were created to make the elected council more accountable to the people they serve.

Local governments in Kerala exercise primary accountability to local community through gramasabha/wardsabha. The local government should place the accounts of the previous years activities relating to the constituency, proposed activities for the ensuing year and an action taken report in the first meeting of the gramasabha/wardsabha every year. The gramasabha/wardsabha can suggest and prioritise developmental activities to be undertaken in the area and the local government should give due consideration to the suggestions. The members of the gramasabha/wardsabha have the right to know the rationale of any decision of the local body and the chairperson/council member is responsible to explain the rationale behind any decision of the local body, as per the local government laws in Kerala. This ensures that the local government has full authority to take a decision or action, but that should be based on sound reasoning and in accordance with the confines of law. In practice, the gramasabha/wardsabha cannot function as an effective forum of accountability in reducing corruption, bettering governance or ensuring transparency and mostly prospective beneficiaries attend it. In many places, it is conducted as a mere formality. Kerala has to enliven the gramasabha and other accountability structures to a great extent.

Citizen's Charter

Citizen charter, to be published by the elected council within six months from the date of assuming office and renewed every year, is another mechanism that ensures the accountability of the elected council to the people. The citizens charter should contain the name of the services the local government offers, the requirements of obtaining the services and the time span required to get the services by a citizen, in the prescribed format. If the local body fails to provide the services within the time limit as promised in the citizens charter, the citizen can approach the ombudsman indicating it as an incidence of maladministration. The citizen’s charter is a means to ensure the answerability of the local government to the people in offering services within the time limit offered and the quality promised in the charter. Citizens charter is an internal check. If the service delivery of the local government fails as against the promises offered in the charter, people can invoke the external check by the ombudsman through filing a simple petition. Ombudsman can treat the failure as a case of mal-administration and penalise the guilty.

On the other hand, the local governments in Kerala are responsible or answerable to the State government in many respects. Government can call for any document of the local government and has the authority to collect any information regarding local governance from the secretary or chairperson. Government can issue policy directions and such directions have the force of law, if they are in accordance with the state policies. Each local government has the responsibility to publish an administration report describing all its activities by 30th of September every year. The State Government has absolute power to dissolve a local government, if it has not passed its budget before the commencement of the financial year resulting in financial crisis or if the majority of elected functionaries have resigned. If government wants to dissolve a local government on any other persistent defaults in performing its duties, the government needs to obtain prior advice from the ombudsman about its legality and the Government can take final decision on the basis of such advice.

Audit and inspection are other regulatory mechanisms that ensure accountability of local governments to the legislature and state government. But it should be ensured that the control of the State government over local bodies should not be allowed to evolve into decline in autonomy and more centralisation of authority. The delicate balance between the control from above and freedom of autonomy of the local governments need to be maintained meaningfully.

The local governments in Kerala provides ample opportunity to the citizen to indicate their views about governance between elections through many means. The communication between voters and their representatives make the inflow and outflow of information easy. The representatives should have the obligation to explain the reasons of every public action to the voters regularly. The citizen, on the other hand, should have been given the power to recall its representative from the office in local governments, which we lack in Kerala. The accountability is considered to be very low, if the voter has limited provision to take action against over-action or in-action of the representatives in between the elections. For enhancing the degree of accountability, suitable administrative mechanisms that enhance the citizen’s participation as frequent as possible need to be established. Local government laws in Kerala provide for many provisions for constituting functional committees, sub-committees, ward committees etc and such provisions need to be made a functional reality.

Participatory Peoples Planning

The process of participatory planning in Kerala provides for multi-directional accountability of elected functionaries, appointed officials, local experts etc in formulating local plans in accordance with the aspirations of people through the well-formulated stages in the planning process. The stages in planning are need identification through gramasapha / wardsabha that consisting of voters, strategy setting in the development seminar that consists of key persons in the local government, stake holder discussion to ensure consensus, draft project and plan preparation by sectoral task forces, plan finalisation by local government council, plan vetting by Technical Advisory Committee consisting of voluntary experts and plan approval by District Planning Committee as the last phase. All these stages involve different categories of people in the local planning and certainly that enhances accountability in local governance.

The provision of right to information was embedded in local governance right from 1999 and that makes every file, record or register of the local government under the scrutiny of the public who wants to see or get a copy of any of them on paying the actual cost of copying. This ensures that a local government may not be able to do anything resulting in a record that cannot be shown to the public. The provision reminds the functionaries about the answerability, to the public.

The agenda of the local government council is a public document to be publicized three days ago in the notice board and the meetings can be viewed or listened by the media or public.

A council member has the right to call the attention of the elected council in its meeting on the neglect of any responsibility entrusted to it, misutilisation of property vested with it or needs of any of its locality and the issue thus raised need to be duly considered by the elected council. This implies that the local government is accountable to the urgent needs of the people coming within the realm of local governance.

The inexperience of the representatives, their ignorance of rules and regulations and absence of familiarity with development administration make the representatives dependent on bureaucracy, thereby reducing their accountability. The dependence of the elected representatives on benamies or elites also reduces their accountability. The party centered politics also reduces their accountability. Over dependence of political executives on bureaucracy, benamies or political bosses may reduce the accountability of local government to the people.

Accountability of the Elected Head
The chairperson is the chief executive authority of the local government and is accountable to the council for any of his action. In the council meeting, he presides over and controls the proceedings. But in council decision-making, majority decides and he is ‘the first among equals’ with the power of exercising a casting vote, in addition, in case of equal voting ties. The council members of the local governments have the power to restrict the chairperson's action as chief executive authority by putting structures through majority resolutions. Any member if the council can test the bonafides of any action of the local government through raising questions in the council meeting. Motion of no confidence by majority is a weapon, the council can exercise if the chairperson's action exceeds the contours set by the council.

The elected head is the chief of the officials and has the responsibility to ensure proper management of them including sanctioning the casual leave of the chief of divisions, suspension of non-gazetted officers etc. He has the responsibility to ensure that all payments are in order and has not made any payment as against the laws as advised by the officers. The elected head is responsible for the management of financial resources, human resources and other assets of the local government.
His official position as a chief executive of the local government make him accountable to the state government and people in diverse ways.

Accountability of the Secretary
The Secretary, as the chief executive officer of the local government, is accountable to the council. He is responsible to the local government in furnishing periodic reports on the administrative actions taken or on the progress in implementation of resolutions. He is accountable to the chairperson for implementation of his lawful directions and accountable to local government for any official action done in exercise of his role as the chief executive officer of the local government.

The responsibilities of the Secretary

The Secretary has the responsibility to give information required by the state government, legislature, legislative committees etc. regarding the functioning of the local governments. The secretary is responsible to keep all the records of the local government functioning and to provide those records for audit inspection. He should clarify the questions raised by the audit officers and take follow up actions on audit inspection reports by authorities of audit wings such as director of local funds audit, performance audit officer and the Accountant General.

The secretary is responsible to the local government council, standing committees or steering committees to provide lawful clarifications on any aspect of administration, to provide any record and to provide details of actions taken on any prior decision.

The Secretary is accountable to the Auditor for submitting Annual Financial Statement and other administrative records for examination, failure of which is a punishable offence. All other officers will have to exercise accountability to the auditors through the Secretary, who coordinates the audit activities.

Secretary is the link between the political executive and the officials, the interpreter of political decisions and the overseer of rules of transactions of business in the local government office. He is the first among the secretary level transferred sectoral officials designated as ‘ex-officio secretaries’. Secretary is the main instrument of inter-sctoral coordination.

Accountability of employees and officers
The employees or officers of the local government are accountable to the secretary or chairperson. The secretary has the authority to specify the duties of the officers below him and has the power to exercise supervision and control. The council can decide the duties of the sectoral officers in tune with the state government policies. The chairperson has overall control over the officials including the secretary in any local government.

The secretary, officials or other beaurocrats were so far made accountable through the formal system of disciple and control, which made them insular from public so far. Now through citizens charter, right to information, gramasabha and other participatory mechanism such as committee system, they are becoming increasingly answerable to the public for the acts of commission or omission in local government services.

General accountability enforcement measures
The provision for compulsory publication of notice prior to imposing or increasing the tax for the first time indicates the local governments accountability to the people while formulating any new policy. The beneficiary list of local government; need to be published in public before its finalisation. The publication of agenda of the local government council three days in advance and the publication of the minutes on the notice board later are measures for ensuring accountability. Many other provisions for publications of notice or information to the public exist as part of transparency measures and those provisions are meant for ensuring accountability in local governments. Publication of budget, public works estimates and audit reports in public are measures to ensure accountability of local governments in Kerala.

Each local government needs to prepare its budget well in advance before the commencement of the new financial year. The budget remains as a guiding force in expenditure assignments of the local government. Once the budget is formulated and approved, every expenditure item of the local government should be in conformity with the limits set in the budget.

The council is accountable to the auditors to make them know that all official actions in local governments is in accordance with set practices of rules, regulations and laws in force. Transparency measures and peoples right to know enable one to know the inner reality of decision making in local government and that enhances its accountability. People must enhance the use of right to access information in order to ensure accountability.

The local government has the liability to keep appropriate records of accounts to show that every business of the local government is done in the due manner with all fairness. The records need to be shown to the public who apply for examination of them, auditors who want to verify them and any officer authorised by the government assigned with examining them. The ombudsman and tribunal, if needed, can call for any record for examination and summon any elected or appointed official for seeking clarifications. Every member of the local government also has the right to examine any record from the secretary with prior notice to the president.

Issue of licence to traders and factory owners, as an exercise of regulatory power of the local government, ensures that those licencees are accountable to the local government for the conditions stipulated in the licences and the licensing system ensures that the licencee holders should follow the rules, regulations and the conditions set in the licence document. The licensing system makes the traders and factory owners accountable to the local government for creation of a safer environment for living, through the licence regulations.

Every village officer is accountable to the local government to provide information available in the records which he posses in his office and to help the local government authorities to collect taxes due to the local governments. As well, police officers are duty bound to assist the local government authorities in providing support in the execution of the powers of the local governments.

Ombudsman ensures accountability measures in local governance by deciding petitions on corruption, irregularities and mal-administration. Any one aggrieved by any instance of corruption irregularity or mal-administration can invoke the ombudsman by filing a petition and the decision of the ombudsman is abiding on the local government or its functionaries. The local government functionaries are hence accountable to the ombudsman, if they engage in maladministration, corruption or irregularities. Ombudsman can punish the culprits based on examination of records, simple trial process or detailed enquiry. The institution of Ombudsman when first introduced in Kerala consisted of a High Court judge, two District Judges, two government secretaries and two eminent public citizens nominated in consultation with the Leader of Opposition in the Legislative Assembly. The seven-member Ombudsman was reduced to a one-member Ombudsman later in 2001. The Ombudsman was overloaded with complaints right from the beginning and that makes it difficult to settle the conflicts within a reasonable time, even though a six-month period is stipulated in the law for settling the disputes. But the existence of the Ombudsman instils fear in the minds of the corrupt and callous functionaries to some extend, as the Ombudsman can punish the perpetrators.

Performance audit

Performance audit is another mechanism that ensures accountability in local governments. Performance audit is a concurrent quarterly auditing system being considered as a corrective mechanism, done by government officials categorized as performance audit teams consisting of a group of three each that conducts performance audit for three-days in each Panchayat.

The tribunal for Local Governments is another quasi-judicial grievance redressel mechanism. The tribunal can exercise appellant or revision authority over the exercise of regulatory powers by local governments or its functionaries. Tribunal is presided over by a District Judge who can entertain appeals or revision petitions from citizens aggrieved by a decision of the local government, on matters stipulated by the government, mainly licensing, taxing and similar regulatory items.

Accountability in local governance can be enhanced by encouraging participatory process. Participation of people is necessary for ensuring responsiveness in government and involving community in decision-making. Gramasabha, Neighbour Hood Groups, holding of public discussions, community contracting, working groups, other committees etc. ensure public participation and that open-up new ways to ensure accountability.

Ways to improve accountability
Accountability in local governments in Kerala can be improved through a variety of measures. Some of the measures that may enhance accountability are as follows: -

• Enforcement and strengthening of all laws, rules and regulations relating to local governance by all actors-particularly the state government agencies- in local governance

• Creating an environment for bringing all law-breakers to the ombudsman

• Formulation and enforcement of code of conduct for various actors in local governance as stipulated in the local government laws

• By intensifying inspection, monitoring & evaluation as envisaged in the statutes

• Encouraging wider dissemination of information on local governance, facilitating feedback from citizen and promoting follow-up activities

• Opening up a suggestion box at all local government offices to collect public grievances and timely redressal of them by the authorities which in turn will diminish the number of petitions to the Ombudsman

• Ensuring timely audit by various audit parties and follow-up on the implementation of audit recommendations by the state government

• Enforcing the citizens charter and ensuring of transparency provisions. A multi-pronged approach consisting of sensitisation, non-governmental initiatives and penal measures need to be used for enforcing the citizens charter

• Setting minimum standards for service delivery as part of citizens charter or other measures and rewarding exemplary officials to keep them motivated

• Improving community involvement and ensuring quality in service delivery to the possible extent through encouraging committee system rather than through bureaucratic measures

• Training all new functionaries on their roles and responsibilities including the accountability of each actors in local governance

• Training the public in accountability and transparency measures as a reverse process to increase the public demand for it. Ensuring regular civic education for citizens so as to make them aware of their civic rights and empower them to demand accountability

• Improving the channels of communication between local government actors and the public as a means to exercise accountability easily

• Exposing the functionaries having corruption tendencies so as to diminish their discretion and monopoly and to raise the level of absence of accountability among them

• Strengthening the overseeing institutions of the State pertaining to decentralisation that make policies, formulate programs and evaluate the implementation

• Strengthening the existing vertical and horizontal checks and balances and effectively punishing the corrupt, at last in obvious cases

• Ensuring the elected officials stop involving in the implementation of projects other than in a supervisory manner and concentrating on policy making, overseeing and monitoring

• Reducing the dominance of vested interests in local government procurements through law reforms, procedural mechanisms and participatory measures such as involving more people in decision making

• Encouraging transparency through promoting investigative Journalism and publishing of internal affairs of local governments widely to draw public attention

• Improving the deterrent measured to increase fairness in decision-making and vitalizing the management practices in local governance so as to make a balanced exercise of everybody’s role

• Publicizing the names of local governments that are not compliant with rules, by the state government and penalizing them as per laws

Summing up
Decentralisation is a very complex process, which requires a lot of patience to put it in to practice. Ensuring accountability in public governance requires much more patience and concerted efforts from all the proponents and promoters of decentralisation. Local governments in Kerala have been endowed with well balanced and well knit accountability systems and procedures. But putting all those accountability measures into practice is a very challenging task. Making those accountability measures workable in the local governments is the tough task the Kerala has to undertake, in order to bring in features of good governance in the local government system in the State.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu