[Urbanstudy] REMINDER: INVITATION for the consultation on 'Making Community Participation Act truly participative', 26.4.2011, 10 AM - 12 PM, Ashirwad, Bangalore

[Harish Poovaiah]

WELCOME to a consultation on:

*Making Community Participation Act (**The KMC Amendment Act 2011) **truly
participative*

*(26th April 2011, 10am-12pm, Ashirwad, Bangalore)
*

*
*

Section 13A of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act is amended as
CHAPTER-IIIA on Area Sabhas and Ward Committees to facilitate people’s
participation at grassroots level. This Act was passed in the Assembly on 13
th January 2011 and got the assent of the Governor.

The essence of the Community Participation Law is to institutionalise
citizen participation in urban governance, to provide a formal platform for
the citizens to participate, plan, prioritise and decide for themselves on
what they need from the urban local body, which operates on their money – in
other words, to decide how their money should be spent by their local
government, keep a watch on the development works and prevent corruption. In
the ‘area’ or the ward or the city, people shall have their say in the
planning directly.

The intended law has noble intentions. But the law in its current form is
woefully short on all of them.

   1. Currently the law applies only to Corporations, depriving people of
   other 224 towns and cities of Karnataka their right to participate in
   governance of their cities/towns.



   1. In its present form it is fraught with undemocratic and
   people-unfriendly provisions.



   1. In the entire Act the word ‘community participation’ appears only
   twice, in the introduction and in the customary definition. That’s it. Then
   the ‘community participation’ is forgotten throughout, conveniently, though
   the entire Act is meant to institutionalise the same. The definition is
   totally inadequate.
   2. In the Act, an ‘Area’ comprises the area of a few contiguous polling
   booths.  The Area Sabha Representative (ASR) is to be ‘nominated’ by the
   Corporation on the recommendation of the Councillor, instead of being
   elected by the Area Sabha (the body of electors of the polling booth areas),
   as suggested by the Model Nagararaj Bill circulated by the Union Ministry of
   Urban Development. Any nomination process is undemocratic.  It will only
   reproduce the voice of the existing political forces and not let the
   different voices of civil society be heard.  Being nominated, the ASR
   will not be accountable to the people of the area but only to his political
   bosses.
   3. The Area Sabha has been given the functions of merely ‘suggesting'
   plans and remedies for deficiencies in a few basic services, such as water
   supply, sanitation and street lighting, and ‘assist the activities' of
   public health centres ‘promote' harmony, ‘cooperate' with the ward
   committee, etc.
   4. There is no link between the Area Sabha, the ASR and the ward
   committee.  The ward committee members are again nominated, independent
   of the Area Sabha Representatives. The model Community Participation Bill
   circulated by the Union Ministry of Urban Development says that the ASR
   should be a member of the ward committee and represent his area. As per this
   Act, the Area Sabha and the ASR will merely be decorative and powerless and
   have no role in the ward committee which is the main decision-making body.
   5. More than anything else, the Councillor is to be given veto powers
   over any decision taken by the ward committee making the concept of people’s
   participation meaningless. This strengthens and perpetuates the prevalent
   wrong perception that elected representatives are our ‘rulers’ and not
   ‘representatives’.
   6. The functions assigned to the Area Sabhas and the Ward Sabhas are
   minimal and they are not in consonance with the true spirit of the
74thConstitutional Amendment Act (Nagarapalika Act).

   7. The powers given to the members of the Area Sabha, who are the true
   sovereigns, are minimal and they have only been given powers to ‘suggest’,
   ‘recommend’ and ‘assist’ and have no independent decision-making powers for
   their areas.  These powers are less than those given to Grama Sabhas in
   rural areas.
   8. Area Sabhas are not given powers to get all information pertaining to
   their areas, take decisions regarding the use of the ward’s properties and
   resources, plan, prioritise and budget for their wards, hold officials
   accountable, monitor all works, get their  grievances redressed at area
   level and conduct social audits of works.  Without these powers, the
   concept of citizen participation will be meaningless.

We made necessary suggestions to the Act through wide consultations to
correct all the above deficiencies and presented these to the government.
But, these positive changes are opposed on the ground that ours is a
‘representative' and not a ‘participatory' or ‘direct' democracy.  Then the
question arises – why this Act at all?

*Therefore how do we, the people/citizens’ groups, get together and take
concrete steps to press for desired changes in the Act at this juncture. *



To answer this question, we have planned a series of consultations across
the State with all stakeholders, beginning with a brainstorming session in
Begaluru to chart out our next steps collectively.



We look forward to your participation and contribution in this direction.



Date: 26th April 2011

Time: 10 AM-12 PM

Venue: Ashirwad, St. Mark’s Road, Bangalore



Yours sincerely,



CIVIC Bangalore                                            Urban Research
Centre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20110425/d4589ab1/attachment-0001.html>