The seed of discord
Wednesday, 8 April 2009
Shamsul Huq Zahid
The national parliament (Jatiya Sangsad) 'unanimously' passed the Upazila Parishad (UZP) Bill, 2009 Monday making the UZPs overwhelmingly dependent on the 'power' of the Members of Parliament (MPs).
The MPs belonging to both treasury and opposition benches displayed rare unanimity while the bill was put to voice vote in the House. Why should not they? The bill transforms them into all important persons in the decision making process of the UZPs.
The bill has made it mandatory for the elected UZPs to seek advice from the local MPs while dealing with every issue, administrative or otherwise and send copies of the minutes of their meetings to the MPs. Even the UZPs have been barred from sending any issue to the government without having prior consultations with the local MPs.
The UZP chairmen, who were elected recently under an ordinance that had vested full authority in the UZPs, and many experts who favour the introduction of a strong and independent local government system in the country, protested the all-powerful role of the MPs in the affairs of the upazilas. But the protest from the upazila chairmen was rather meek because of the fact a big majority of the chairmen, politically, belong to the ruling party.
The ordinance in question lapsed following the newly elected government's decision not to place it before the parliament for ratification within the time limit stipulated in the Constitution. The bill adopted by the parliament Monday revived the UZP Act -- with certain amendments -- passed during the tenure of the last Awami League government.
While passing the new bill, the MPs ignored the criticism from the upazila chairmen, enlightened section of the society and the media that the law in question would rob the elected UZPs of all powers and make them subservient to the lawmakers. Some critics even termed the MPs' role as provided under the new bill as 'unconstitutional'.
However, Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives Minister Syed Ashraful Islam, who piloted the bill in the House, brushed aside all criticism saying that amendment made to the bill were not at all unconstitutional.
The LGRD minister may be right in letter but not in spirit of the relevant Articles of the Constitution. The Article 59(1) says: Local Government in every administrative unit of the Republic shall be entrusted to bodies composed of persons elected in accordance with law and the clause 2 of the same Article details functions, including administration and work of public officers, maintenance of public order and preparation and implementation of plans relating to public services and economic development, of the local government bodies to be prescribed by an Act of Parliament
Article 60 asks Parliament to confer, by law, powers on the local government bodies, including power to impose taxes for local purposes, to prepare their budgets and to maintain funds.
The Constitution asks Parliament to confer power on local government bodies, including UZPs, so that the latter can carry out the role as mandated by the Constitution or any other law, not to make the lawmakers the overlords at the UZPs.
If one reads between the lines of the articles 59 and 60 of the Constitution, one would realise the fact that those speak strongly in favour of having elected local government bodies with all the powers to effectively handle local level development and administrative issues.
There is no denying that MPs, traditionally, have been playing an important role in the development and administrative issues in their respective constituencies. But, legally speaking, they are not allowed to meddle in affairs that are the responsibilities of the local government institutions. The Constitution empowers the local government bodies, none else, to carry out such a role. The bill passed in the House last Monday, however, tends to lend legal coverage to such activities by the lawmakers.
The MPs must be extremely happy with their newly-found role at the local level. The deafening sound created by the thumping of the desks by the MPs belonging to both treasury and opposition benches at the time of 'unanimous' adoption of the bill did tell it all.
But, it seems, the bill in question has sown a seed of discord between the elected UZPs and the MPs, which might prove detrimental to the process, if there is any, of making the local government system effective and fruitful.
Besides, the bill would create another group of disgruntled people -- the Upazila Nirbahi Officers (UNOs). It makes the UNOs to act as secretaries of the UZPs, instead of chief executive officers. However, except for the members of the bureaucracy, none is expected to show any sympathy towards this particular group.
The conflict of interests between the Upazila chairmen and the MPs might make things difficult as far as local level development is concerned. But such a possibility should have been avoided by the government. For, the country badly needs strong and effective local government institutions, the UZP being at the centre of the same.
zahidfe@yahoo.com
The national parliament (Jatiya Sangsad) 'unanimously' passed the Upazila Parishad (UZP) Bill, 2009 Monday making the UZPs overwhelmingly dependent on the 'power' of the Members of Parliament (MPs).
The MPs belonging to both treasury and opposition benches displayed rare unanimity while the bill was put to voice vote in the House. Why should not they? The bill transforms them into all important persons in the decision making process of the UZPs.
The bill has made it mandatory for the elected UZPs to seek advice from the local MPs while dealing with every issue, administrative or otherwise and send copies of the minutes of their meetings to the MPs. Even the UZPs have been barred from sending any issue to the government without having prior consultations with the local MPs.
The UZP chairmen, who were elected recently under an ordinance that had vested full authority in the UZPs, and many experts who favour the introduction of a strong and independent local government system in the country, protested the all-powerful role of the MPs in the affairs of the upazilas. But the protest from the upazila chairmen was rather meek because of the fact a big majority of the chairmen, politically, belong to the ruling party.
The ordinance in question lapsed following the newly elected government's decision not to place it before the parliament for ratification within the time limit stipulated in the Constitution. The bill adopted by the parliament Monday revived the UZP Act -- with certain amendments -- passed during the tenure of the last Awami League government.
While passing the new bill, the MPs ignored the criticism from the upazila chairmen, enlightened section of the society and the media that the law in question would rob the elected UZPs of all powers and make them subservient to the lawmakers. Some critics even termed the MPs' role as provided under the new bill as 'unconstitutional'.
However, Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives Minister Syed Ashraful Islam, who piloted the bill in the House, brushed aside all criticism saying that amendment made to the bill were not at all unconstitutional.
The LGRD minister may be right in letter but not in spirit of the relevant Articles of the Constitution. The Article 59(1) says: Local Government in every administrative unit of the Republic shall be entrusted to bodies composed of persons elected in accordance with law and the clause 2 of the same Article details functions, including administration and work of public officers, maintenance of public order and preparation and implementation of plans relating to public services and economic development, of the local government bodies to be prescribed by an Act of Parliament
Article 60 asks Parliament to confer, by law, powers on the local government bodies, including power to impose taxes for local purposes, to prepare their budgets and to maintain funds.
The Constitution asks Parliament to confer power on local government bodies, including UZPs, so that the latter can carry out the role as mandated by the Constitution or any other law, not to make the lawmakers the overlords at the UZPs.
If one reads between the lines of the articles 59 and 60 of the Constitution, one would realise the fact that those speak strongly in favour of having elected local government bodies with all the powers to effectively handle local level development and administrative issues.
There is no denying that MPs, traditionally, have been playing an important role in the development and administrative issues in their respective constituencies. But, legally speaking, they are not allowed to meddle in affairs that are the responsibilities of the local government institutions. The Constitution empowers the local government bodies, none else, to carry out such a role. The bill passed in the House last Monday, however, tends to lend legal coverage to such activities by the lawmakers.
The MPs must be extremely happy with their newly-found role at the local level. The deafening sound created by the thumping of the desks by the MPs belonging to both treasury and opposition benches at the time of 'unanimous' adoption of the bill did tell it all.
But, it seems, the bill in question has sown a seed of discord between the elected UZPs and the MPs, which might prove detrimental to the process, if there is any, of making the local government system effective and fruitful.
Besides, the bill would create another group of disgruntled people -- the Upazila Nirbahi Officers (UNOs). It makes the UNOs to act as secretaries of the UZPs, instead of chief executive officers. However, except for the members of the bureaucracy, none is expected to show any sympathy towards this particular group.
The conflict of interests between the Upazila chairmen and the MPs might make things difficult as far as local level development is concerned. But such a possibility should have been avoided by the government. For, the country badly needs strong and effective local government institutions, the UZP being at the centre of the same.
zahidfe@yahoo.com