City government the answer

The task force formed to recommend ways out of the financial and other messes following the findings of the white paper on the country's economy has diligently been shedding light on the jobs at hand. Apart from the fiscal issues, there are other highly important matters that have to be fixed on a short-term and long-term basis in order to overcome the constraints standing on the way to gaining economic momentum. Obviously, the capital city overburdened with a population of 20 million and functioning as the centre of not only administration but also of almost all other affairs of life such as education, health and livelihoods now cries for an overhaul. There is no need for expert to tell that the city has by now become unliveable. The daily ordeals its inhabitants and others coming for official, business and other purposes suffer are enough for them to realise how hostile the environment is.

The task force has rightly suggested reunification of the two city corporations ---Dhaka South City Corporation (DSCC) and Dhaka North City Corporation (DNCC). Well, this certainly is a mega city but that does in no way justify that its bifurcation can deliver better service. It is the independence of a single city corporation---which once it was---free from different ministries' influences that can actually bring about the desirable change. In fact, all big cities should be run by their elected local government representatives. Two mayors of the Awami League, ABM Mohiuddin Chowdhury, mayor of Chittagong city and Mohammad Hanif, mayor of Dhaka city were vocal about city governance. Neither the AL government nor the bureaucracy was ready to relinquish their grips on the capital city and the port city for reasons understandable. But the mayors were quite right in their demands. Political expediency has got the better of a proven system of city management doing well in developed countries.

The country's constitution, however, speaks for city or metropolitan government in no uncertain terms. Article 59 of the Bangladesh constitution allows bodies comprising elected representatives to run local government. Local government institutions ought to be responsible for planning and development at the local level. The constitution also envisaged expansion of its functions courtesy of an act of parliament to such areas as: a) administration and work of public officers; b) maintenance of public order; c) preparation and implementation for public services and economic development. Of course, financial independence is a crucial matter and the big cities should be able to pool enough resources for the purpose.

Allowing the local government bodies to develop as institutions is not in the interest of a political government and the bureaucracy here. But had it been the case, there would be a check and balance of power at all levels of governance. The rise of autocracy or fascism was not possible in an environment of devolution of power and financial authority. Whatever positive developments in the city the mayors could achieve came through their charisma and personal relationship with the highest political authority. But that is not desirable. It is institutionalisation of the system that makes the real difference in running an organisation or body. All the large cities in the country should be handed over to their elected representatives for running the show.