Lack of good Governance -------------------------------- The State of Assam suffers from many woes and there are many reasons for this state of affairs. But what strikes most prominently is the lack of good governance. The ruling government is in its third continuous term and it came to power winning election by an overwhelming majority. The victory went to the head of the government so much that it immediately went to stupor allowing the public administration to drift in the prevailing current in a mode of inertia. Due to lack of vibrant opposition, it remained in this comfortable inertia until it received a jolt from its internal weakness where personal ambitions of some younger leaders led to dissidence and then from the result of the recent Loka Sabha election that exposed its vulnerability. Instead of handling the looming crisis with alacrity, the leadership has hurriedly covered up its weaknesses and has failed to change its gear. Instead of holding the rein of governance strongly it has allowed it to drift as before. When the voters of a democratic state elect a government it expects that the elected government will deliver the developmental goods. The party in power has to realize its responsibility. In the first term, the party began well; at least it rescued the state from the financial doldrums in which the state was plunged during the regime of the previous government. A sense of financial discipline was noticeable and there were some developmental activities despite corruption. The people ignored corruption because the previous regime was equally corrupt, if not more. It was given a second term because the people felt that though nothing spectacular was achieved it did better than its predecessor government and deserved a second term. But the disconnection between the people and the government started from the second term. Its performance was uneven, there were strong murmurs about rampant corruption and political observers noticed a sense of complacency in the ruling power. Its developmental indices were lower than the neighbouring states, the difference between the state per capita income and the national per capita increased. However, the purposeful utilization of some Central schemes in health and education saved the Government face. It won the third term only because the opposition was in disarray, the people had no choice and thus it came to power on negative voting rather than on the strength of its achievement. The leadership failed to see this and started suffering from an illusion that it was invincible hoping to enjoy power perpetually. There were many boastful utterances in this regard. The government then went on a sleeping mode. There is too much trust deficit between the people and the government so much so that every initiative, good or bad, is suspected and motive is imputed. It has very badly affected the law and order of the state. A small issue that can be sorted out at the district level becomes an issue of massive protest because of strong undercurrent of suspicion about the motive of the government. Having continuously ignored the civil society (excepting those institutions and organizations which act as the lackeys of the ruling party), the government fails to read the pulse of the people and fail to douse the discontent at the incipient stage. Aspirations of different sections of people often come to conflict point in a melting pot social environment of the state and they need sensitive handling. But the government very often responds to such socio-political security issues reactively and by that time the situation deteriorates making the issue complicated. The ethnic harmony in the state has remained brittle. Trust deficit widening the gap between the people and the government, the government often fails to read the situation adequately before it goes out of hand. It then depends on security forces whose action lead to collateral damages. The government in such situation finds suppression as the better course of action rather than consensus built on ethnic understanding. The Government has handled regional insurgencies to a great extent and that is one feather in its cap, but it has been surprised by Islamist terrorism’s rapid spread in certain parts of the state. Unless tackled proactively, they will destabilize the region fanning communal disturbance in a very big way. Lack of governance is also noticed in handling environmental issues. It has no long-term perspective on environmental matters. Tree-cutting is rampant, encroachment on forest and protected reserves is galore, settlements are not planned and so when the settlers encroach on lands disturbing environment, there is resistance from such settlers supported by their Associations as and when the Government starts late action without resettlement plan, that too in a sectarian way. Urban degradation in Guwahati, the premiere city of the state, is getting worsened every year due to flood, hap-hazard growth leading to spread of slums. Failure to introduce a systemic waste disposal mechanism in Guwahati (also in other cities) has contributed to environmental hazards in a big way and it is a major problem where governmental actions have so far failed. The Government often claims that it has been able to improve security situations so much that the people are no longer afraid of nocturnal movements. However, the law-abiding people think otherwise. Street hooliganism has increased, girls do not feel safe on road at night, there is no restraint on pub-hopping reckless groups of merry-makers and the government has not realized that without increased strength police stations cannot cope with such social degradation caused by anti-social elements. I will end by quoting a sentence from the United Nations Global Issues, which is relevant for good governance, “Good governance promotes equity, participation, pluralism, transparency, accountability and the rule of law, in a manner that is effective, efficient and enduring.”
Posted on: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 22:49:16 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015