“Only Elected Representatives Can Guarantee Check And Balance”

August 20, 2004
3 MIN READ
A
A+
A-

— Krishna Prasad Sapkota

Krishna Prasad Sapkota is the president of the DDC Federation of Nepal. A former DDC chairman of the Kavre district, Sapkota spoke about the present challenges facing the local bodies. Excerpts:

To what extent has the country suffered following the absence of elected representatives at the local level?

The whole process of planning has gotten derailed. There used to be 14 stages earlier to get approval of a particular development plan involving the meetings and approval from councils at village to district level. That practice, which used to check and balance local bodies, has become defunct. The government officials are never concerned about the planned development of the districts. The internal sources of the DDCs have started gradually decreasing. The speed of development has come screeching to a halt.

How can you say that the government officials or nominated representatives are not working?

At present, even two officials are acting as council and making any kind of decision they like. At some places, the nominated DDC officials are reported to have pocketed up to Rs 4.5 lakhs in the name of medical treatment and so on.

So, what do you suggest?

We suggest to adopt democratic means. At present, the most democratic and appropriate decision would be to invoke the provision of extending the tenure of local bodies by one year as stated in the Local Self Governance Act. In fact, we have examples of elected local bodies getting extended by even up to 25 years in parts of India.

The present government also has the UML, which had been supporting the extension of tenure. But it has not made any decision to that effect till now. What do you say?

It is unfortunate. There is no logic in the response from those who oppose the extension of the tenure. We hope the government would soon take the appropriate decision.

Do you believe there should be more devolution? Are our local units capable to handle the added responsibilities?

There is no alternative to more devolution. In fact, I believe that any project that is constructed wholly within a VDC should be handed over to the VDC; and projects involving two or more VDCs should be handed over to DDC. Likewise, projects within a district should be handled by the DDC; while those involving more than two districts be handled by the center. Unfortunately, instead of devolution the government seems to interested in concentration of power. Of late, the government has decided to remove the technical unit within DDCs to set up separate District Technical Office, thereby, creating yet another unnecessary line agency.