Anthropology Optional Online Coaching Call-8595390705

1. Governance by Sanjeev Kumar; (Handout-1) Syllabus of Governance & Social Justice ❖ Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation. ❖ Development processes and the development industry —the role of NGOs, SHGs, various groups and associations, donors, stakeholders. ❖ Welfare schemes for vulnerable sections of the population by the Centre and States and the performance of these schemes; mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections. ❖ Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources. ❖ Issues relating to poverty and hunger. ❖ Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability, e-governance applications, models, successes, limitations, and potential; citizens charters, transparency & accountability and institutional and other measures. ❖ Role of civil services in a democracy. ❖ Appointment to various Constitutional posts, powers, functions and responsibilities of various Constitutional Bodies. ❖ Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial bodies. ❖ Pressure groups and formal/informal associations and their role in the Polity. ❖ Representation of People Act, Electoral Reform and Model Code of Conduct. Yojna IAS norms and actions are structured, sustained, regulated and held accountable. Governance may take many forms, driven by many different motivations and with many different results. For instance, a government may operate as a democracy where citizens vote on who should govern and the public good is the goal, while a non-profit organization or a corporation may be governed by a small board of directors and pursue more specific aims. charities, institutional and other Governance: It is the action or manner of governing a state, organization, etc. Governance refers to the systems and processes by which organizations, institutions, or societies are managed, directed, and controlled. It involves making decisions, setting objectives, and overseeing the implementation of those decisions. Governance provides a framework for accountability, transparency, and responsible decision-making. Governance can exist at various levels, such as national governments, corporations, nonprofit organizations, educational institutions, and even online communities. It encompasses both formal structures, such as laws, regulations, and policies, as well as informal practices and norms that guide behavior. An entity (known as governing bodies) can govern. The most formal is a government, a body whose sole responsibility and authority is to make binding decisions in a given geopolitical system by establishing rules and guidelines. Governance is the way rules,

2. What does Governance mean? Governance can be defined as: “The system by which entities are directed and controlled. It is concerned with structure and processes for decision making, accountability, control and behaviour at the top of an entity. Governance influences how an organisation’s objectives are set and achieved, how risk is monitored and addressed and how performance is optimised”. Governance is a system and process, not a single activity and therefore successful implementation of a good governance strategy requires a systematic approach that incorporates strategic planning, risk management and performance management. Like culture, it is a core component of the unique characteristics of a successful organisation. Yojna IAS irrespective of their caste, class, gender, region etc develop their full potential and receive the public services effectively, efficiently and equitably. Objectives of Governance: It aims to ensure accountability, transparency, responsiveness, rule of law, stability, equity and inclusiveness, empowerment and broad-based participation. Governance also represents the norms, values and rules through which public affairs are managed in a manner that is transparent, participatory, inclusive and responsive. In broad sense, governance is about the culture and institutional environment in which citizens and stakeholders interact among themselves and participate in public affairs. A shift from “government” towards “governance” has been taking place in the field of public administration. “Less government” and “more governance” are emphasized in this phase. Government stands for “institutional” entity while governance stands for “institutional and networked” entity of public sector, private sector and the voluntary sector. Governance today is seen in terms of sum total of laws, policies, organizations, institutions, co-operative arrangements & structures that provides necessary goods and services to the citizens that help building their capabilities so that they could realize their full potential. Public, in the framework of governance, is not seen as “passive receiver of benefits” offered by the government but as “active stake holder” in the process of administration which has right to receive some “entitlements” which augment its living standards. Thus governance means collaborative partnership among the public, government, communities, market and the voluntary organizations. Good Governance: The concept of “good governance” assumed significance since the 1990s with the publication of two reports by the World Bank. In the first report entitled “Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable Growth” (1989), the Bank emphasized upon the need for good governance. While in the second report entitled “Governance and Development” (1992), the Bank identified a number of aspects of good governance. Good Governance aims at building an atmosphere and conditions in which all citizens

3. Yojna IAS ethical standards, a government ensures the trust and confidence of its citizens, fostering a relationship built on transparency and accountability. ● Equity, highlighting the principle of fairness and equal treatment for all citizens. This pillar underscores the significance of accountability in governance, emphasizing the need to ensure that every member of society receives impartial and empathetic treatment. This is particularly critical in addressing the concerns of vulnerable or Pillars of Good Governance: The foundation of Good Governance rests upon four essential pillars, each contributing to the strength and integrity of the overarching structure. These pillars are meticulously designed to uphold the principles and values crucial for the effective functioning of any governing system. ● Ethos, emphasizes the fundamental concept of public service. It underscores the importance of a government's commitment to serving its citizens with dedication and diligence. This pillar embodies the idea that the primary purpose of governance is to address the needs and concerns of the people, placing the citizen at the forefront of administrative endeavors. ● Ethics, establishes a framework of moral values that should guide the conduct of those in positions of authority. This involves a steadfast commitment to honesty, integrity, and transparency in all administrative processes. By upholding these

4. marginalized sections, thereby promoting a society founded on justice and inclusivity. ● Efficiency, introduces the imperative of streamlined and effective governance. It advocates for the incorporation of modern technologies, such as e-governance, to facilitate the swift and efficient delivery of public services. By leveraging information and communication technologies (ICT), governments can minimize bureaucratic hurdles, reduce delays, and enhance the overall responsiveness to the needs of the citizens, thereby optimizing the functioning of the administrative machinery. Yojna IAS Rule of law: Adherence to established laws, regulations, and procedures to ensure fairness and justice. Good governance requires fair legal frameworks that are enforced impartially. Impartial enforcement of laws requires an independent judiciary and an impartial and incorruptible police force. Good governance typically includes the following key principles: Accountability: Those in positions of authority are responsible for their actions and must be answerable for their decisions and performance. Not only government institutions but also the private sector and civil society organizations must be accountable to the public and to their institutional stakeholders. In general an organization or an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law. Citizens Holding Governance Accountable: Making public agencies work and ensuring that their service delivery would meet the criteria of efficiency, equity and customer satisfaction, requires citizens to voice their grievance and their dissatisfaction in an organized manner. The mechanisms used could include citizens’ feedback and surveys, citizens’ report card and social audit. Transparency: accessible, and understandable to the relevant stakeholders. Decision-making processes and information should be open, Citizens Seeking Information: Access to information is a fundamental pre-requisite for ensuring citizens’ participation in governance. Making information available (on procedures, prices, application forms, officers to be contacted for grievance redress etc.) is the first step in any strategy to empower citizens for their interaction with the government. The Right to Information Act in India has in essence already laid down the ground-work for ensuring this prerequisite for citizens’ participation in governance but it is only by greater citizens’ awareness of their rights under this Act that its vision of transparency can be realized. Participation: The inclusion of diverse voices and perspectives in decision-making processes to ensure that different interests are considered. Participation by both men

5. and women is a cornerstone of good governance. Participation could be either direct or through legitimate intermediate institutions or representatives. The concept of citizens’ participation in governance is essentially based on the premise that citizens have a legitimate role in influencing decision making processes that affect their lives, their businesses and their communities. At the ideological level, direct citizens’ participation in governance is seen as contributing to a healthy democracy because it enhances and improves upon the traditional form of representative democracy to transform it into more responsive and thus a participative grassroots democracy. Yojna IAS Minister every six months to follow up those objectives. This engagement not only gave citizens’ groups the opportunity to make suggestions on what needed to be done but also enforced accountability in the city service provider by creating a forum where their promise, once made, had to be fulfilled in a time bound manner. Citizens’ Active Participation in Decision Making Giving citizens ongoing access to the decision-making process, beyond periodic consultations is a more mature and intensive form of citizens’ participation in governance which can help them negotiate with government for better policy, better planes, better project etc. At this stage, the citizens no longer merely voice their grievance with government, but it involves government actually working with citizens. Examples of such participation would include participatory municipal budgeting, allowing citizens to vote directly through a referendum on specific proposals for changes in public policies, projects and laws, mandatory public hearings before approval of projects of decisions such as changes in land use plans that affect the environment or the local community giving citizens’ representation on management committees for local hospitals and school. Citizens Giving Suggestions Listening to the voice of citizens not just during periodic elections but on an ongoing basis is the starting point of participation of citizens in governance. Such listening could be done through public hearings, surveys, referendum etc. where citizens can give their suggestions with regards to their problems as well as the possible solutions. Citizens are in the best position to articulate their needs and suggest the appropriate solutions which is why there is often a need to complement local knowledge and skills with governance expertise. Such participation can lead to proactive engagement with the policy making process thus creating entry points for further participation and mobilization of citizens to enter the arena of governance. For example, the Bangalore Agenda Task Force (BATF) was set up in 1999 with the goal of transforming Bangalore into a world class city with the participation of its leading citizens including the heads of its major IT companies, as well as prominent members of the Bangalore civic community. BATF was asked to explore how to improve city services and infrastructure, expand the city resource base and enhance the administrative capacity of the city corporation. The BATF held public summits in the presence of the media and the Chief Efficiency and effectiveness: Governance systems should be capable of achieving desired outcomes in a timely and efficient manner. The concept of efficiency in the

6. context of good governance also covers the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment. Equity and inclusiveness: Ensuring fair treatment and opportunities for all individuals and groups, irrespective of their backgrounds. A society’s well being depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they have a stake in it and do not feel excluded from the mainstream of society. This requires all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have opportunities to improve or maintain their wellbeing. Yojna IAS attitude towards citizens and their grievances. 3. Red Tapism: Bureaucracies over the world are expected to adhere to rules and procedures which are, of course, important for good governance. However, at times, these rules and procedures are ill-conceived and cumbersome therefore do not serve their purpose. Also, government servants sometimes become overly pre-occupied with rules and procedures and view these as an end in themselves. Responsiveness: Governance structures should be capable of adapting to changing circumstances and addressing emerging issues or challenges. Good governance requires that institutions and processes try to serve all stakeholders within a reasonable timeframe. Barriers to Good Governance The Second Administration Reforms Commission in its report entitled “Citizen Centric Administration: The Heart of Governance” (2009) identified five barriers to good governance in India: 1. Attitudinal Problems of the Civil Servants: There is a growing concern that the Civil Services and administration in general, have become wooden, inflexible, self-perpetuating and inward looking. Consequently, their attitude is indifferent and insensitive to the needs of citizens. This, couples with the enormous asymmetry in the wielding of power at all levels, has further aggravated the situation. The end result is that officers perceive themselves as dispensing favour to citizens rather than serving them and given the abject poverty and illiteracy etc, a culture of exaggerated deference to authority has become the norm. 2. Lack of Accountability: A common reason usually cited for inefficiency in governance is the inability within the system to hold the Civil Services accountable for their actions. Seldom are disciplinary proceedings initiated against delinquent government servants and imposition of penalties is even rarer. This is primarily because, at most levels, authority is divorced from accountability leading to a system of realistic and plausible alibis. Cumbersome disciplinary procedures have added to the general apathy towards discipline in government. Moreover the safeguard provides to civil servants- which were well intentioned –have often been misused. Another reason for lack of accountability is that performance evaluation systems within the government have not been effectively structured. The complacency that the system breeds has resulted in employees adopting an apathetic or lackadaisical

7. 4. Low level of Awareness of the Right and Duties of Citizens: Inadequate awareness about their rights, prevent citizens form holding erring government servant to account. Similarly, low levels of compliance of rules by the citizens also acts as an impediment to good governance. When citizens do not adhere to their duties they infringe on the freedom and right of other citizens. Thus, awareness of rights and adherence to duties are two sides of the same coin. A vigilant citizenry, fully aware of its rights as well its duties, is perhaps the best way to ensure that officials as well as other citizens discharge their duties effectively and honestly. 5. Ineffective Implementation of Laws and Rules: There is a large body of laws in the country; each legislated with different objective- maintaining public order and safety, maintaining sanitation and hygiene, protecting rights of citizens, giving special protection to the vulnerable sections etc. Effective implementation of these laws creates an environment which would improve the welfare of all citizens and at the same time, encourage each citizen to contribute his best towards the development of society. On the other hand, weak implementation can cause a great deal of hardship to citizens and even erode the faith of the citizenry in the government machinery. Yojna IAS Management Information System and performance measurement mechanism and thereby ensuring accountability of public service functionaries. 4. Responsive- streamlining the processes to speed up service delivery and make system more responsive 5. Transparent- brining information hitherto confined in the governance documents to the public domain the making processes and functions transparent, which in turn would bring equity and rule of law in responses of the administrative agencies. e- Governance e- Governance has steadily evolved from computerization of Government Department to initiatives that encapsulated the finer point of Governance, such as citizens’ centric service, and transparency. Lesions from previous e-Governance initiatives have played an important role in shaping the progressive e-governance strategy of the country. Due cognizance has been taken of the notion implementation across the various arm of Government of National, State, and local levels, a programme approach needs to be adopted, guided by common vision and strategy. This approach has the potential of enabling huge interoperability through standards, and of presenting a seamless view of Government to citizens. that to speed up e-Governance e-Governance is basically a move towards SMART governance implying: simple, moral, accountable, responsive and transparent governance. 1. Simple- meaning simplification of rules, regulations and processes of government through the use of ICTs and thereby providing for a user-friendly government. 2. Moral- connoting emergence of an entirely new system of ethical values in the political and administrative machinery; technology interventions improve the efficiency of anti-corruption agencies, police, judiciary etc. 3. Accountable- facilitating design, development and implementation of effective

8. So e-Governance is being forwarded as the solution to solve this problem. The use of Information and Communication Technology facilities the reach of government both geographically and demographically without the face to face interface with the citizens, E-Governance ensures that the public services are provided to the citizens in equitable manner and that economic growth benefits them all. Information and Communication Technology encompasses the following features: ● It facilitates an efficient way of storage and retrieval of data. ● It offers several ways of fast transmission of information. ● Even very large amount of data can be processed in very less time. ● The government procedures can be speeded up to large extent. ● The information base before taking a decision becomes quite wide thereby facilitating close to rational decisions. ● As the norms of procedures are clear to all & work is done according to those norms, it promotes transparency. ● The main feature of e-Governance is that it promotes accountability of public officials. Yojna IAS From the above definition it is clear that e-Governance or “electronic governance” basically means applying the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to the procedures of government functioning to bring about a “Smart, Moral, Accountable, Responsive and Transparent” (SMART) governance. The means of ICT can be used for the following processes: ● Interchange of information with citizens, other government departments and business organizations Definition of e-Governance 1. According to World Bank “E-Government refers to the use of information technologies (such as Wide Area Networks, the Internet and mobile computing) by government agencies that have the ability to transform relations with citizens, businesses and other arms of government. The benefits can be less corruption, increased transparency, greater convenience, revenue growth and cost reductions”. 2. According to UNESCO “E-Governance may be understood as the performance of governance via the electronic medium in order to facilitate and efficient, speedy and transparent process of disseminating information to the public and other agencies and for performing government administration activities”. 3. According to THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE “E-Governance means the use of electronic technologies in three areas of public action: ● Relation between the public authorities and civil society. ● Functioning of the public authorities at all stages of the democratic process (electronic democracy). ● The provision of public services (electronic public services)”

9. ● Faster and efficient delivery of public services ● Improving the internal efficiency ● Reducing the costs and augmenting income ● Bring about Business Process Re-engineering in government department i.e. their administrative restructuring ● Enhance the quality of services. Yojna IAS service. This improves the accessibility as well as the quality of public services. The citizens become free to choose when to interact with the government, from where to interact with the government and how to interact with the government. The government becomes citizens friendly by this freedom of interaction with the government. 3. G2B (Government to Business) - Business organizations also provide important goods and services to the citizens, So they also have a stake in the process of VARIOUS STAGES IN E-GOVERNANCE The operationalization of the process of e-governance involves the following stages generally: 1. COMPUTERIZATION: The first phase involves equipping the government offices with personal computers for the purpose of word processing. Later on data processing also started on these computers. 2. NETWORKING: In this phase different government entities get connected through the sharing of information and data. 3. ON-LINE-PRESENCE: When the sufficient infrastructure is developed for the broadband internet connectively and a general culture developer to use web site for seeking information then the government departments also starts maintaining the websites which contain information about their organizational structure, contact details, report publishing and mission statements etc. 4. ON-LINE INTERACTIVITY: The final step is to open a two way channel of exchange of information between the government and the citizens, civil society organizations and the businesses etc. Through adoption of this means the face to face interaction between in these entities is reduced and reduces the scope of corruption and demand of favours by the public officials. Facilities like downloadable forms, instructions, acts, rules etc. are provided through this means. TYPES OF INTERACTIONS FACILITATED BY E-GOVERNANCE E-Governance facilitates interactions among different stakeholders. The various types of interactions involved may be classified as flows: 1. G2G (Government to Government) - For governance it is quite necessary that a proper system of interaction is maintained among the different government entities. This system of interaction could be horizontal i.e. among the different functional departments within the organization or with the external government agencies and vertical i.e. among the national, state & local level agencies or between the different levels in the organization. 2. G2C (Government to Citizens) - Through this means of interaction, an interface is created between the government and the citizens for efficient delivery of public

10. governance. It is necessary to cut red tape, reduce time and costs and to build a transparent & accountable environment for these organizations to function efficiently. Some of the processes like procedures for obtaining licenses & permits, procurement process and revenue collection etc. in this type of interaction could be performed electronically. 4. G2E (Government to Employees) - Besides performing the duties of states, the government is also an employer. In developing societies specially it is the biggest employer. For accomplishing the duties of an employer it has to interact with its employees on a regular basis. The use of ICT helps in making this interaction easier and efficient. Yojna IAS serve this purpose. It brings governance to the doorsteps of citizens. A large number of services are provided by the government in an efficient way through recent communication means such as fast internet connectivity, increased mobile penetration etc. The increased reach of government both geographically and demographically also empowers the citizens to participate in the process of governance. The bureaucratic red tape is removed by eliminating the interface between the citizens and government officials. The aim of e-governance is to Advantages of e-Governance The various advantages accruing from e-governance are: 1. Greater Accessibility to Information: It is now a widely recognized fact that information is power. If proper information is provided to citizens then it makes them conscious of their right and they demand better services from the government. ICT empowers people in this sense. It provides them timely and reliable information on various aspects of governance. Information can also be of various types like simple information in the form of laws, rules, forms and procedures etc. and detailed information like report public database, performs reports etc. All this information affects the quality of governance provided to the citizens directly or indirectly. 2. Delivery of Quality Services to the Citizens: There is an immediate benefit in terms of time, efforts and money in delivering the public services. The various methods of ICT provide online and single window accessibility to the public services and delivery of goods. The final objective of e-Governance according to the Second Administrative Reforms, constituted in India, is to provide services to the citizens based on “life cycle approach” i.e. providing public services which are required right from the birth to death. 3. Business Process Re-engineering Government: It has to be understood that e-Governance is not just the computerization of government department, it is about administration reforms. E-Governance cannot be successful if it is not preceded by a detailed Business Process Re-engineering (BPR). BPR leads to simplification of complicated bureaucratic processes, eliminates the redundant processes, simplifies the structure and recommends the modification in various rules, regulations and laws. The whole process of administration reforms is about reducing the distance between the administration and the citizens. The fast growth in the communication technology would exactly Leading to Efficient & Effective

11. simplify the functioning of government, enhance the decision making powers of the administration and to ultimately augment the efficiency & effectiveness of the government operations. The government becomes accountable, transparent and open to the citizens. The productivity of government sector increases as a result. 4. Increasing the Reach of Government: The whole process of administration reforms is about reducing the distance between the administration and the citizens. The fast growth in the communication technology would exactly serve this purpose. It brings governance to the doorsteps of citizens. A large number of services are provided by the government in an efficient way through the recent communication means such as fast internet connectively, increased mobile penetration etc. The increased reach of government both geographically and demographically also empowers the citizens to participate in the process of governance. Yojna IAS The United Nation E-Governance Survey splits the process of delivering services into two parts: front end and the back end. Front end is in interaction with the public and refers to the “government” as people see it. While the back end refers to the internal operations of an organization that support the service delivery and it is not visible to the general public or business. The back end does not interact with the outside agencies. In this sense e-governance is “networked or connected governance”. For the front end to E-Government Readiness Index United Nations (UN) has devised an “e-governance readiness index” for assessing the preparedness of various countries for implementing e-governance. This index had been devised in 2008 in “The United Nation E-Governance Survey”. This survey is done annually by the UN. The following parameters have been taken into consideration for constituting this index. I. Web Measure Index It measures the levels of a country’s online presence. II. Telecommunication Infrastructure Index It measures the infrastructural capability of a country to implement the e-governance projects. This is a composite index comprising of the following five primary indices: ● Internet Users per hundred persons ● Personal Computers per hundred persons ● Main telephone lines per hundred persons ● Cellular telephones per hundred person ● Broad band lines per hundred persons III. Human Capital Index This index measures the level of literacy and general awareness prevalent in the society. It comprises of adult literacy rate with two thirds weight and combined primary, secondary & tertiary gross enrolment ratio with one third weight. Thus, it is clear that successfully implementing e-governance projects does not entail just improving infrastructure or establishing online presence but also building the human capital which is competed enough to mould itself in a culture of governance through electronic ways.

12. provide effective services it is necessary that the back end is efficient and does not have complicated procedures. In the words of this survey “An effective connected government is about a ‘bigger and better’ front end with a ‘smaller and smarter’ back end”. Yojna IAS “Governance” and not “e” as the aim of e-governance: For making any e-governance strategy successful it should be realized that e-governance is about improving governance Overemphasis on imbibing technology rather than on reforming the administrative processes has led to the failures of many e-governance projects across the globe. One of the Special Reports on “Technology and Governance” published in the leading magazine “The Economist” mentions “So far, though, the story of e-governance has been one of quantity, not quality, Indeed, its most conspicuous feature has been colossal waste of taxpayers’ money on big computer system, poorly thought out and overpriced. Some of those who have studied e-governance call it a dangerous enthusiasm”. In a report published in 2002 based on the status of e-government projects in developing countries, it was mentioned that out of all projects 35% were total failures, 50% were partial failures and only the rest 15% could be categorized as successful. and not just about technology. Reasons of failure of e-governance project: Some of the reasons why many of the e-governance projects failed and could not be implemented beyond the “pilot phase” are: ● The preparedness of the organization in the areas of information technology does not match the actual technology required for the successful implementation of the project. ● The organizational processes are not reformed keeping in tune with the platform provided by e-governance. ● The management does not imbibe a culture which supports the e-governance initiatives. ● Necessary human and material resources are not provided to the e-governance projects sometimes. ● Many a times such projects are forced from outside and are not seen as required by the organization itself. In such a scenario the members of the organization do not have a stake in the success of such projects.

13. Citizen Charter It makes the public organization citizens friendly, transparent and accountable. It is a document of commitments made by government agency to the citizens in respect of the services being provided to them. It empowers the citizens to demand the committed standard of service. It also deals with the responsibilities of the citizens towards the public organization. The vision and mission statement gives the broad outcomes desired of the public organization and the strategy to achieve it. The commitment of public organization to provide quality services is the central theme of citizens’ charter. Citizens’ charter is not legally enforceable and hence, non-justiciable. Yojna IAS ● Involve and improve ● Work with other providers Citizens’ Charters: Evolution Citizens’ charters were introduced in 1991 in UK by the Prime Minister John Major. It places citizens as the “customers” of the public services. They aim at making public services responsive. In the words of a report released by UK Cabinet Secretariat in 1992: “The Citizens’ charter sees public services through the eyes of those who use them. For too long the provider has dominated and now it is turn of the user…. The citizens’ charter will raise quality, increase choice, accountability”. secure better value and extend The six principle of citizens’ charters on the basis of which they were started are: ● Quality - improving the quality of services ● Choice - for the users wherever possible ● Standard - specifying what to expected within a time frame ● Value - for the taxpayers’ money ● Accountability - of the service provider (individual as well as Organization) ● Transparency - in rules procedures, schemes and grievance redressal These six principles were revised in 1998 in UK to propound the following principles: ● Set standards of service ● Be open and provide full information ● Consult and involve ● Encourage access and promote choice ● Treat all fairly ● Put things right when they go wrong ● Use resource effectively Thus the crux of citizens’ charters is to define the entitlements of “customers” to receive the services with a pre-determined set to standards, the conditions to be met by the customer and the remedial measures which can be availed by the customers when

14. these services standards are not met. Thus the citizens’ charters empower the citizens to demand quality services from the public organizations within fixed time frame. The Charter mark scheme: It was introduced in U.K. to make public organizations conscious towards the quality of services provided by them. A set of six criteria was developed and different public organization was judged on the basis of these criteria by an evaluating agency. The criteria which were enunciated in this scheme were following: ● set standards and perform well ● Actively engage with your customers, partners and staff ● Be fair and accessible to everyone and promote choice ● Continuously develop and improve ● Use your resources effectively and imaginatively. ● Contribute to improving opportunities and quality of life in the communities you serve. Yojna IAS ● Accurate and comprehensive information, and progress reports provided; ● Professionalism and competence of staff and treating customers fairly; ● Staff attitudes- friendly polite and sympathetic to customers’ needs. It was an independent agency to evaluate the public organizations. The valuable contribution to improve public service, made by citizens’ charter, was recognized by Public service committee of U.K in 1997. Bernard Herden Committee (2006): This committee was constituted in U.K to review the working of charter mark scheme. The charter mark holders are generally very positive about the scheme. They feel it is a valuable management tool in driving up standards and that it helps motivate members of staff. There is much anecdotal, but little hard evidence of the Charters Mark’s effectiveness. The Charter Mark Scheme continues to prosper, but percentage penetration of the whole public sector- and therefore overall impact remains quite low. There is now a very low level of public awareness of the Charter Mark, and a general skepticism about quality schemes and awards was displayed by members of the public that we met in focus groups. However, on balance, people do believe that the holding of some form, of quality scheme or aware might influence choice where this applies. It is to be noted that most public services do have performance standards and reports to Parliament and the Public on how well they have met these. Most public services providers do also measure levels of customer satisfaction however this is often not particularly rigorous. Comparisons even within sectors are difficult to make, with a few notable exceptions. Delivery of Promised Outcomes and Handling Problems Effectively; ● Timeliness of service provision; The recommendations of this committee were accepted and in 2008 “Customer Service Excellence Scheme” was launched. In this scheme the public organizations were

15. required to get “Customer Service Excellence” by the independent assessment agencies. The criteria adopted for this independent assessment include following five criteria: ● Customer Insight ● Culture of the Organization ● Information and access ● Delivery ● Timeliness ● Quality of Service Yojna IAS During the year 2002-03, the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievance (DARPG) engaged in a professional agency to develop a standardized model for internal and external evaluation of citizens’ charters in a more effective, quantifiable and objective manner. This agency also carried out evaluations of implementations of charters in five Central Government organizations and 15 departments/ organizations of the states of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. Citizens’ Charter in India In 1996 the Government of India took active interest in making India Administration responsive and accountable towards the people. Framing Citizens’ Charters for all the public organizations was suggested as a strategy for a achieving these ends. 1997 a conference of the Chief Ministers was called. In this conference it was decided that at the state and the central levels citizens’ charters would be framed in all the public organizations which have a public interface such as the Indian Railways, Postal Department, Telecommunication Department, Hospitals and Revenue Department etc. The Department of Administration Reforms and Public Grievances (DAR & PG) has taken active interest in this regard since then. From 1997 to 2007, 115 citizens’ charters at the central level and 650 citizens’ charters at the union territory & state levels have been framed. In addition to it the DAR & PG has framed some guideline also for formulation of effective citizens’ charters. These are: ● The citizens’ charters should be simple ● They should be designed after carefully consulting with the edge level bureaucracy because after all only will implement it. ● Just announcing the citizens’ charters will not serve the purpose. The public servants have to be sensitized and trained towards improving their functioning and behaviour. ● It should be mentioned clearly in the charters that the quality of services mentioned in the charters are promised to be provided by the public organization though it is not justiciable. ● Citizens’ charters should be reviewed in at least six months. The performance of the public servants should be audited and proper feedback should be obtained from the citizens. Evaluation of Citizens’ Charters

16. The findings of the evaluation carried out by the agency were: ● In a majority of cases charters were not formulated through a consultative process. ● By and large, service providers are not familiar with the philosophy, goals and main features of the charter. ● Adequate publicity to the charters had not been given in any the department evaluated. In most departments, the charters are only in the initial or middle stage of implementation. ● No funds have been specifically earmarked for awareness generation of citizens’ charters or for orientation of staff on various components of the charter. Yojna IAS recommended a decentralized way of farming Citizens’ Charter with the head office supervising the process. 3. Wide Consultation Process- Inputs from the experts, consultation with the civil society organizations, and feedback from the field offices of the suggestions of the citizens should be the sources of deciding the content of Citizens’ Charters. They should not be just the aspirations of the organizations but the organizations accountable. A study sponsored by the Department of Administration Reforms and Public Grievances on evaluations of the Citizens’ Charters was carried out by the Indian Institute of Public Administration in 2008. The observations/ findings of this study are: 1. Citizens’ charters have still not been adopted by all Ministries/ Departments. 2. There was lack of precision on standards and commitments in several cases. 3. There is often little interest shown by the organizations in adhering to their charter. 4. On the communications front, the charter programme has been throttled on account of poor planning and resource commitment for publicity. 5. In some cases, the charters have becomes a one-time exercise, frozen in time. 6. There was general lack of accountability and review mechanisms. 7. The charters were devoid of participative mechanisms for effective performance. Suggestions for Making Citizens’ Charters Effective: The issue of making Citizens’ charters effective has been analyzed by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission in India in its IV Report “Ethics in Governance” and in the XII Report on “Citizen Centric Government”. Some of the recommendations which it has made are following: 1. Internal Restructuring Should Precede the Charter Formulation- Citizens’ Charter will be successful in achieving their aim only when the existing procedures of the public organizations are analyzed in detail and it is seen whether they need to be reformed to make the public services citizens centric. If such an exercise is not conducted before the formulation of citizens’ charters then they will just be rhetoric rather than sincere commitments. 2. One Size Does Not Fit All- It has been suggested by the Commission that the Citizens’ Charter should be framed taking into consideration local needs of the organization. They should not be dictated from above rather the contextual conditions should guide them to make them effective. The Commission has

17. 4. Firm Commitments to be made- firm commitment should be made in providing the quality services to the citizens. The quality of services should be measurable wherever possible. 5. Redressal Mechanism in case of default- The citizens’ charters should mention the grievance redressal mechanism existing in the organization which could be approached in case any norm is by passed by the organization. 6. Periodic Evaluation of Citizens’ Charters- independent agencies should evaluate the Citizens’ Charters. They should judge whether the organizations are successful in achieving the norms of services which are mentioned in the charters. 7. Benchmark using end user feedback- The feedback of end users should be the final criteria to benchmark the quality of services provided by different organizations. 8. Holding Officers Accountable for Results-The Heads of Department should be made accountable for the implementation of the Citizens’ Charter as well as for the services provided by their organizations. Further specific responsibilities should be fixed on particular officers in case of defaults. 9. Including Civil Society In The Process- There are many states in India where involving the civil society has resulted in better formulation of Citizens’ Charters generating awareness about them administration accountable to them. Hence civil society is central to the Citizens’ Charters. Yojna IAS building its own capacity to continuously improve upon service delivery. The second component of the model, “Service Delivery Capability” postulates that an organisation can have an excellent performance in service delivery only if it is efficiently managing the key ingredients for good service delivery and building its own capacity to continuously improve upon service delivery. ● The Third component of the model, “Public Grievance Redress” requires a good grievance redressal system operating in a manner that leaves the citizen more According to the commission and educating people about making Sevottam Model The citizens’ charter is one of the three modules/components of the “Sevottam Model”—the other two being service delivery and public grievance redressal. Sevottam is a “Service Delivery Excellence assessment-improvement framework to bring about excellence in public service delivery. The term “Sevottam” is formed by joining two Hindi words “seva” and “uttam” meaning “service” and “excellence” respectively. Model” which provides an ● The implementation, thereby opening up a channel for receiving citizens’ inputs into the way in which organisations determine service delivery requirements. Citizens’ charters publicly declare the information on citizens’ entitlements thereby making them better informed and hence empowering them to demand better services. ● The Second component of the model, “Service Delivery Capability” postulates that an organisation can have an excellent performance in service delivery only if it is efficiently managing the key ingredients for good service delivery and first component of the model requires effective citizens’ charter

18. satisfied irrespective of the final decision. with how the organisation responds to complaints/grievances, Transparency and Accountability Yojna IAS accountability. This can extend to all faces of the development process, viz. planning (people’s planning), programming, budgeting (budget analysis, participate budgeting) release of funds (publication of funds released, public expenditure review) award of contracts (procurement watch, integrity pact), and monitoring of contracts (independent quality inspection). Post planning, this may extend to implementation (hospital advisory, management committees, community forest management), progress of implementation (corruption watch) and evaluation (citizen report card, community scorecards) and audit Transparency and accountability are the main constituents of good governance while good governance is a pre-condition to achieve human development which is the main concern or mission and the ultimate goal for all government programme and activities. Transparency and accountability are interrelated concepts and mutually reinforcing. Without transparency there could not accountability, transparency would be of no value. The existence of both conditions contributes to an effective, efficient and equitable management in public and private institutions. be any accountability. Unless there is Transparency in government means an open government: government actions are explained; the accessibility of government responsiveness of government to new ideas demands and needs. services and information and the Open government is one where the business of government and administration is thrown open to all, at all levels, so as to ensure effective public participation, security and oversight. Transparency implies openness of both organization and individuals constituting it and requires openness of information, processes, policy, decisions, actions and outcome. Process transparency covers both internal business and supporting human resource, financial, and administrative processes, and external services delivery and regulation. Openness through transparency becomes a means to greater civic participation in an enabled environment, where there is effective free flow for information both ways, to see through the working of the government and to verify whether or not public servant are meeting their obligations to expectations of citizens. All four components of accountability - answerability, sanction, redress and system improvement need information to account for unacceptable conduct, decisions and actions. The gaps in conventional supply side accountability have led to the emergence of demand side accountability. “Social Accountability is the institutionalization of durable social control over policies and their implementation. Civil society is progressively showing tremendous potential to participate directly in institutions of horizontal

19. (public hearing, participatory audit, citizen audit request, monitoring of audit compliance, general law on social audit)” open government can thus be said to have three components viz. ● Right to information ● Civic engagement in the processes of governance , and ● Accountability for what the government and public servant says and does. Yojna IAS However, while transparency is an important ingredient for securing accountability, the link between the two is not automatic. The extent to which measures to promote transparency can contribute towards strengthening voice, is dependent on: (1) the manner and type of information displayed, and (2) the design of the transparency mechanism; including the responsiveness of the system and the Institutional space available for follow up action and awareness on the part of the Citizenry of those avenues Similarly while ‘voice’ is a necessary condition for accountability it alone is In contemporary India, open government was first stressed in the landmark judgement of justice P.N. Bhagawati of the Supreme Court of India in 1981, (S.P. Gupta vs Union of India (1982), where, besides giving a general description of open government he stressed the need for increased disclosure in matters relating to public affairs. Noting that open government means ‘information availability to the public with greater exposure of the functioning of government which would help assure the people a better and more efficient administration’ he went on to describe Open Government in India to be “the new democratic culture of an open society towards which every liberal democracy is moving and our country (India) should be no exception”. Accountability It is broadly defined as the obligation of those holding power to take responsibility for their behavior and actions. Essentially the term includes three main elements; answerability- the need for justification of actions; enforcement- the sanction that could be imposed if the action or justification of actions is found to be unsatisfactory; and responsiveness – the ability of those held accountable to respond to the demands made. It is implicit in these core elements of transparency, which is defined as ‘the degree to which information is available to outsiders that enables them to make informed decisions and or to assess the information’. Defined such, the links between the two are said to be fashioned along two lines –transparency of information is instrumental for demanding accountability because without information individuals cannot know the operations of the state. Further, transparency of information is also seen as significant for motivating citizens to exercise ‘voice’ power. Voice power is defined as the capacity of citizens to pressurize the state/frontline officials in ensuring effective delivery of service. The role of transparency in strengthening voice has been given particular emphasis i.e. greater transparency leads to more empowerment, which in the context of more participation amplifies ‘voice’ and the assertion of voice results in greater Accountability.

20. inadequate in delivering accountable relationships. Thus while citizens may be motivated to raise their demands it does not imply that power holders will be responsive to them. Factors which influence the translation of voice claims into effective accountability include; (1) the personal capacities of citizens (2) the nature of the political framework. Yojna IAS judiciary, provide what is commonly termed horizontal accountability which is the capacity of state institutions to check abuses by other public agencies and branches of government, or the requirement for agencies to be accountable sideways. Vertical accountability is the means through which citizens, mass media and civil society seek to enforce standards of goods performance on leaders and officials. In the context of the relationship between transparency and voice, the capacity of individuals to make use of information and demand accountability is influenced principally by the manner in which information is provided. If information is not made available in a relatable manner, average citizens would not be able to understand. In addition to the criteria of relatability, Pritchett (in 2006) asserts that for improving service delivery, information displays should also be relevant and regularly updated. Hence for citizens to be able to use information exert influence and demand accountability. Transparency initiatives need to be targeted at the providing information which is relevant, regular and disaggregated so as to be relatable at the local levels-where peoples’ capacity to verify/falsify the data are most valuable. Clear transparency by itself does not guarantee the exercise of voice on the part of citizens. For citizens to protest against inadequacies and authorities to sanction that Responsible requires the availability of institutional space for lodging complaints and awareness on the part of the citizenry of these avenues. For example, BILL to provide for electronic delivery of public services by the Government and Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services Bill. The capacity for individuals to exercise voice is governed by certain precondition which include, ‘a minimum level of awareness of entitlement and rights, the ways in which these are not being met and a degree of social political and financial power’. Thus the poor whose status is characterized by a limited access to both financial and social political resources are the least likely to enable their voice to be heard unless the necessary laws recognize this aspect and specially empower them. Evaluating the ongoing effectiveness of public officials or public bodies ensure that they are performing to their full potential, providing value for money in the provision of public services, instilling confidence in the government and being responsive to the community they are meant to be serving. Horizontal vs. Vertical Accountability The prevailing view is that institutions of accountability, such as parliament and the

21. While parliament is a key institution in horizontal accountability, it is also important in vertical accountability. Citizens and civil society groups can seek the support of elected representatives to redress grievances and intervene in the case of inappropriate or inadequate action by government. In addition, through the use of committee investigations and public petitioning, parliamentary questions, parliament can provide a vehicle for public voice and a means through which citizens and civil groups can question government and seek parliamentary sanctioning where appropriate. Yojna IAS dissatisfied voters can recall their elected representative and vote for an alternative. Political versus Legal Accountability Parliament and the Judiciary act as horizontal constitutional checks on the power of the executive. The role of these two institutions can be further delineated in that parliament holds the executive politically accountable, while the judiciary holds the executive legally accountable. These classifications stem from the fact parliament is a political institution, while the judiciary cans only legal issues. Together, they provide ongoing oversight in order to keep the government accountable throughout its term in office. They may also be aided by other institutions, such as supreme audit institutions, anti–corruption commissions (CVC), ombudsman (Lokpal and Lokayukta) offices and human right bodies (NHRC). Political accountability example is the concept of individual ministerial responsibility, which is the cornerstone of the nation of responsible government. In instances where there is a classic top-down, principal agent relationship, whereby the principal delegates to the agent, the agent is accountable to their direct superiors in the chain-of-command and this constitutes form of vertical accountability. For instance the public official answer to the department/ agency, the department answer to the minister, the minister answers to parliament (in particular in parliamentary system), and parliament answer to citizens. Parliament is again a key actor. In terms of holding government officials to account, parliament is the principal and the officials the agent. Parliament, as principal, requires the government and its officials, as agents, to implement the laws, policies and programs it has approved-and holds the government and officials to account for their performance in this regard. Parliament is also an agent, in that the electorate (the principal) elects legislators to enact laws and oversee government actions on their behalf. The electorate then holds legislators to account at election time and, in a few jurisdictions, through recall, where Social Accountability Social accountability is an approach towards building accountability that relies on civic engagement, namely a situation whereby ordinary citizens and/or civil society organization participate directly or indirectly in making the government accountable. Mechanisms of social accountability can be initiated and supported by the state, citizens

22. or both, but very often they are demand-driven and operate from the bottom-up. It is generally accepted that social accountability mechanisms are an example of vertical accountability if it legally enforceable. Social accountability initiatives are as varied and different as participatory budgeting, administrative procedures acts, social audits, and citizen’s report cards which all involve citizens in the oversight and control of government. This can be contrasted with government initiatives or entities, such as citizen’s advisory boards, which fulfill considerations of social accountability is the role that legislators can play in providing weight to such grass roots accountability mechanisms. For example, a Member of Parliament can represent the concerns of his/her constituents by questioning a Minister during Question Hour in Parliament or by requesting information directly from a government ministry or department. RTI Act strengthens social accountability. Yojna IAS at involving people’s participations in government. The basic idea is to establish a dialogue between the stakeholders i.e. the Government Department and citizens groups like Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs) and Market and Traders Associations (MTAs) in order to work out solution to common civic problems. This scheme has already achieved success in many areas. With a view to expand the participation of the Resident Welfare Association, Government has also organized workshops in all the nine Revenue Districts. The workshops the local officials of Delhi Vidyut Board, Delhi Jal public functions. Often overlooked in The central idea of accountability is: when decision-making power is transferred form a principle (e.g. the citizens) to an agent (e.g. government), there must be a mechanism in place for holding the agent to account for their decision and if necessary for imposing sanctions, ultimately by removing the agent from the power. In the last 10 to 15 years, however, the concept of accountability has become central to democratic administration and public service delivery. International donor communities are suggesting focusing on ‘good governance’. Social accountability is being increasing recognized by state and non-state institutions as a mean of enhancing democratic governance and improving service delivery. In recent years, enhanced space and opportunity for citizen and civil society engagement with the state, have led to a new generation of social accountability practices. These methods and tools are being increasing used across different parts of India, South Asia and the world. Some of the practices that have been applied are: ● Participatory Planning and Policy Formulation (Kerala); ● Participatory Budget Analysis (Gujarat); ● Participatory Expenditure Tracking System ; ● Citizens’ Surveys/Citizens Report Cards (Bangalore, Maharashtra); ● Citizen Charters (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka); and ● Community Scorecards (Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh) ● Bhagidari (Delhi) ● Social audits (AP, Rajasthan) (The Government of Delhi has launched a unique scheme named Bhagidari which aims

23. Board, Delhi Police, Delhi Development Authority and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi sit with the representative of the Resident Welfare Association and deliberate upon local issues so as to find acceptable solutions to common problems facing the residents. This has facilitated a process of dialogue and discovery of joint solutions between the Resident Welfare Associations, Market Traders Associations, Civic agencies and public utility services. Yojna IAS might stem out of a moral-ethical need to account for one’s actions, or out of a legal requirement. It concerns the relationship between those that perform an action or deliver a service i.e. the agent and those on whom the action and service has effect. In this sense, accountability is the leverage that the principal has over the agent. In addition to these methods and tools, many more exist such as campaigns for electoral reforms, public interest litigation, independent evaluation and so forth. It has been well established that social accountability mechanisms can contribute to improved governance, accelerate development, create effectiveness through better services delivery and empowerment. The overall objective of these mechanisms is to promote transparency and accountability in the service delivery processes. The key areas for the use of official accountability methods are in: ● The preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of poverty reduction strategies; ● Government service delivery reform management processes; ● Community-driven development programs; and ● Sectoral interventions (e.g. in health, education, transport, water and sanitation, rural development and urban development programs. and public expenditure It is necessary to study the various challenges and vulnerabilities that come in way of institutionalizing social accountability and how possibly these can be tackled. Also an attempt needs to be made to identify the manner in which the existing institutional designs can be made more accountable and accurate. In addition to this, it is equally important to strengthen the citizens’ voice to empower the community to holds system accountable and in turn take benefit of the various schemes and programmes. Effectiveness and sustainability of social accountability mechanisms is improved when they are “institutionalized”. This involve two also things; first, the state as a ‘partner in progress’ in the broader accountability project, needs to render its own “internal” mechanisms in a way that makes it structurally amenable to accountability and second, the state needs to identify and adopt mechanisms to facilitate and strengthen civic engagement and citizen voice. Accountability is broadly defined as the obligation of those holding power to take responsibility for their behavior and action. This obligation Public accountability i.e. the need for the state to be accountable to its citizen stems out of the ‘social contract’ that the citizens share with the state. In a democracy, this

24. contract is operationalized when citizens elect a government and invest the elected representatives with the power to govern them. The representatives in their turn, acting themselves and through bureaucrats and administrators are obliged to perform their duties of governance in a manner that keeps the citizens’ interest at heart. There is institutional provision to ensure that the government respects this contract. On the one hand there are mechanisms for external accountability, or accountability directly to the citizens. In a democracy, elections are the chief instrument through which is achieved. Citizen consultation and citizen participation in design, implementation and monitoring of state’s services, are also example of this. Alongside, there are also provisions for internal accountability – institutional checks and balances like constitutional separation of power into Judiciary, Executive and responsibilities, internal performance monitoring, and official oversight including bodies like Auditor General, Anti-Corruption Bureaus and Vigilance Commissions are some examples. Public accountability is ensured when these two aspects of accountability are realized together. Yojna IAS the watchers?), lack of adequate funding and limited enforcement capacity all serve to further weaken these mechanisms. Legislature, delegation of tasks and Ensuring accountability in the public sector involves a two-step process. First, the state needs to have a clear understanding of what its citizens want. For this to occur, citizens must hold the state (policy makers and politicians) to account. This relationship is referred to as ‘voice’. The state, in turn, acting as the representative of the people, must be able to transmit these demands to the actual provider of services and ensure that providers perform their functions effectively. Addressing Accountability Failures: Traditionally, efforts to improve accountability proceeded along these two lines-internal and external. On the external front, there have been electoral reforms, social audit, citizens’ charters, various legislations empowering the citizen to demand better and time bound delivery of public services, voter-awareness initiatives and so on, and on the internal front there have been efforts like reorganization of audit and account mechanisms. Important as they are, these efforts have had limited success in improving accountability in governance and services delivery. There are a number of reasons why. Elections as an instrument of accountability have some well-known limitations, moreover, elections only hold elected officials accountable, whereas the vast majority of public officials are appointed bureaucrats and hence not subject to electoral processes. Reorganizing horizontal accountability channels on their part have limitations. It is impossible to monitor the almost infinite number of government actions. Practices like bias and inefficient resource use lend themselves to investigation less easily than more express forms of corruption. Absence of seconds order accountability (who will watch In more recent years there has been an acknowledgement in the policy circles around the world, of these limitations in traditional accountability channels. Alongside was the recognition that citizen participation in state’s activities could play an important role in strengthening accountability and responsiveness in service delivery. An increasing body

25. of literature from around the world documented how participation of citizens in planning, implementation and monitoring of projects not only increases the effectiveness of public service delivery and made it more appropriate, but also increases accountability and reduced corruption. Yojna IAS voice into the everyday working and decision-making processes of the state. There has, in this sense, been a shift from ‘vote’ to ‘voice’ is the principal accountability tool in the hands of the citizens. Second: central to social accountability efforts is transparency in governance. The main channel through which citizens are being empowered to demand accountability is through creation of and access to, more information. So the recurrent theme seems to be: more information means more empowerment, which in the context of greater participation means more voice, which means greater accountability. Accordingly, citizen participation in state’s development activities was no longer seen as a ‘bother’, but was instead actively encouraged as a means to ensure responsiveness and accountability. However, this participation by citizens was of a limited nature in that it was confined to implementation of specific government projects. Measures for responsiveness were largely limited to citizen consultation, and those of accountability largely to monitoring of outputs. There was also a sense in which society was acting as a watchdog in ensuring government accountability. More recently, certain stream of research and practice has questioned the separation between the state and the society. Moving on from the arms-length relationship in pressuring the government from the outside, this current stream of research argues that accountability is best obtained in “co-governance”, citizen groups have been experimenting with inserting themselves more and more directly into the state apparatus: into its core functions and everyday workings, monitoring its hitherto opaque operations, and influencing policy from the inside. Participatory Budgeting in Porto Allegre, Brazil was one of the early experiences in this stream where instead of externally influencing the policy, ordinary citizens were inside the government apparatus, involved directly in the planning and supervision of public spending – activities normally under the exclusive purview of public officials. Some authors argue that form of activism represents a ‘new accountability agenda’ A pioneering instance of this form India was the experience of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) – a Rajasthan based grassroots organization –where citizens (as external actors) directly engage with institutions of internal accountability. MKSS employment ‘social audits’ to empower ordinary citizens to turn into auditors, and obtain access to the hitherto privileged state document such as muster rolls, in order to expose malfeasance. This form of accountability has been called ‘hybrid’ accountability, and is remarkable in that it breaks the state’s monopoly over official oversight and legitimizes citizens-inclusion into hitherto exclusive affairs of the state. Social Accountability involve deploying tools like participatory budgeting, public expenditure tracking, citizen report cards, community scorecards, social audits, citizens charter, and so forth. Two prominent characteristics stand out in these tools and mechanisms. First; social accountability efforts work to enhance and integrate citizen

26. Social Accountability is being increasingly recognized worldwide as a means of enhancing democratic governance, improving service delivery, and empowering citizens. Accordingly governments around the world- from US and Brazil, to Uganda and South Africa, to Sri Lanka and New Zealand –are finding ways to facilitate citizen engagement and foster social accountability. Yojna IAS been issued empowering the Central Vigilance Commissioner. Right to Information Act, 2005 The passage of Right to Information Act in 2005 by Government of India (GoI) ensured timely response to citizen’s request for government information, marking a paradigm shift in the citizen-government relationship in India. The act sets out a practical regime of right to information for citizens. The main objectives of the law on RTI are: ● to set up systems and mechanisms that facilitate people’s easy access to information; ● to promote transparency and accountability in governance; ● to minimize corruption and inefficiency in public offices and to ensure people’s participation in governance and decision making; Right to information also includes the right to: ● Inspection of work, documents, records; ● Taking notes, extracts or certified copies of document or records; ● Taking certified samples of materials; ● Obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device. It is significant that the principle of open access to administrative documents has been defined as a right under section 3 and not merely an interpretive principle which can be invoked regardless of the purpose for which that right is exercised. The Act mandates both proactive and reactive supply of computerization of the appropriate records and their dissemination. In case, where the right to information has been denied by a public official, sufficient information must be provided of the reasons of the refusal. That decision is always reviewable by the appellate authority and the State Information Commission. Right to information has to include the right to protected disclosure of sensitive information. As a prelude to a full-fledged legislation to protect whistle blowers a national resolution on the same has information, cataloging, indexing and Max Weber mentioned that “secrecy is an invention of bureaucracy in the interest of power”. Thus the scholar who considered bureaucracy as the most rational instrument of exercising power was also aware that it tends to adopt secrecy to increase its power. It is now well experience fact that the government which is less open is bound to be corrupt. Further the very foundations of a democratic government are trust and mutual

27. understanding between the citizens & government. They decide the legitimacy of the government. Thus the citizens have the right to know about different administrative activities to sustain this strengthen this trust. Hence, right to information reduces corruption and deepens the process of democracy in the society. This deepening of democracy brings citizens closer to the administration. Thus an open and transparent administration is the fundamental pre-requisite of a democratic administration. Right to Information is a mechanism to achieve this. It is the enlightened citizenry which is the best agency to promote accountability in administration. This is ensured through the Right to Information. Yojna IAS ● Enhancing allocation efficiency through greater attention to the priorities of communities, increased transparency on budget and public resources with public budgeting and public expenditure tracking systems and reduction in ‘rent seeking’; and ● Tightening mechanisms of accountability involving increased transparency from community involvement with public sectors agencies like community participation in school management and community participation in public hearing etc. Participation/ Civil Engagement The constitution method of political participation of people at the grass roots is achieved through the process of devolution to the lower echelons of governance. Even though the Government of India had initiated the process of devolution of power as early as in the 1950s through the Panchayati Raj system and introducing the element of participatory rural works programme through financial participation of beneficiaries, the Union Government brought in the 73rdd and 74th amendments to the Constitution to more firmly institutionalize local government as the third tier of the state. One of the key objectives of local level Government is to ensure that the process of planning for development in the country follows a bottom up participatory development approach. The best example of this is ‘Projects Planning’ in Kerala. It is also firmly established the place of gram sabha (village assembly) and ward committees in the towns, in the constitutional scheme of things. They meet to get information from the officers of the Grama Panchayat/ Municipalities as to the services they will render and the works they propose to do, discuss the budget and details of allocation of funds and also the details of the estimate and cost of materials of the works executed or proposed to be executed, to study the annual statement of accounts, the last audit notes and replies thereto, to suggest remedial measures and to report satisfactory completion of the works, to secure self-discipline among members securing payment of their taxes and repayment of loans and to conduct social audit of works like the works under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee programme. The key goals of community participation are: ● Improving technical efficiency by overcoming information asymmetry, providing communities with information on quality through various forms of monitoring and evaluation, and ensuring that service providers spend resources for necessary technical resources;

28. Following are a few of the administrative accountability measures employed to government agencies in India for securing participation; ● Public disclosures ● A law on community participation to institutionalize citizen participation in local decision making, Citizens charters stipulating standards of service delivery and for penalty for noncompliance. ● Conventional and online help line for grievance redress ● Arrangements for feedback on services ● Whistle blowers protection mechanism ● Public service Delivery legislation conferring right to public services with Grievance officer to quickly investigate and grant relief ● Ombudsman to independently enquires into complaints ● Chief/vigilance officer who reports directly to the government ● Integrity pacts for procurement ● Third party inspection of quality of works and supplies ● Independent evaluation studies Yojna IAS 2. Government portals for information 3. Web based disclosure of information and pro-active publication 4. Electronic on line MIS and FMIS ensure that right information gets to the right people 5. Use of mobile phones and Wi-Fi facilitate engagement 6. Computerized grievance redress mechanisms 7. E-petitions 8. ‘Open for questions’ programme Social Media as Open Government instrument Technology is revolutionizing the way governments are being run. In this knowledge society the relationship between the citizen and government is mediated by information system and their automation. Automation of government internal business and external regulation and service delivery is a must for any e government plan, a beginning towards which has been initiated through the National e-Governance Plan. National Information Technology infrastructure and nationwide distribution database with public information infrastructure are under way. Databases in India suffer from non-standardization, incomplete data collection at all levels, poor quality and unreliability of data, inconsistency in the methodology and technology employed, absence of universal digitization capability, slow digitization of past data, issues of inter-operability of system etc. In order to effectively solve these problems Government has initiatives like national policy on open standards which has been published for soliciting public comments. In the meanwhile progress has been made, by the central and state governments, for progressive use of ICT including Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and satellite imagery to re-engineer transparency, participation and accountability as shown below: 1. Use of internet to facilitate open government

29. 9. Assess to process of service delivery and internal business as in OPEN Social Media is being progressively used for seeking feedback from citizens; pronouncement of public policy; issue based as well as generic interaction and brand building or public relations. In order to encourage and enable government agencies to make use of web 2 technologies which is a dynamic medium of interaction the Department of Information Technology, GoI has released a draft social media strategy. The Framework & Guidelines for Use of Social Media for Government Organization hopes to help the government enhance its outreach, engage and interact with the Indian internet users. Yojna IAS programs implemented by the government. ● Social audit should be made mandatory for all development programmes and be institutionalized for improving local service delivery. ● Evaluation tools for assessing the performance of local bodies should be devised wherein citizens should have a say in the evaluation. ● Rewards schemes should be introduced to incentivize citizen’s initiatives. The Planning Commission and the National Innovation Council organized the first ever ‘hackathon’ on the 12thFive –Year Plan on April 6 and 7, 2013. According to the Report of Open Government Data in India, while government has initiated e-governance initiatives, very few of them have result in publicly accessible databases. Fewer still of those publicly database are ‘open’ in terms of data reusability (technologically, in terms of machine readability and openness of formats), data reusability (legally), easy accessibility (via search engines, for understandability (marked up with annotations and metadata). Putting out raw data will not suffice. To ensure the relevance of open government data, mechanisms have to be put in place to take its benefits to the common person and to marginalized communities both by the government as well as by civil society organizations. Concrete steps on these live will help realize the dream of Open data in the near future in India. The second Administration Commission after detailed studies into the working of government, made comprehensive recommendation in its details reports, among others, on the right to information, citizen centric service delivery, local government, e-Government etc. Some of the recommendations relevant to this Paper, which are being followed up and will further the cause of transparency, improved citizens centric service delivery and participatory governance, are listed below: ● Suo motu disclosures under the RTI Act, 2005 should not be confined to the seventeen items provided in Section 4(1) of that Act but other subjects where public interest exists should also be covered. ● Citizens Charters should be made effective by stipulating the service levels and the remedy if these service level are not met. ● Regular citizens’ feedback, survey, and citizens’ report cards should be evolved by all government organization for gauging citizens’ responds to their services. These should be used as inputs for improving organization efficiency. ● Citizens should be actively involved in all stages of the welfare and development persons with disabilities etc.) and

30. Various Bills pending in the Parliament regarding judicial standards, public service delivery, electronic services, food security, land acquisition etc. have citizen participation provisions. Challenges in Implementing Right to Information Act in India Passing the Right to Information Act is just the beginning of a long journey to make the government institutions accountable, transparent and open. There are some challenges that lie ahead in ushering in a culture of openness in public organizations. Some of these are: ● In India there are several other acts which have provisions contrary to providing information to the public. Some of these acts are Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 especially represent the colonial legacy showing a culture of mistrust and secrecy. ● Provisions should be made to get the reports of all the commissions laid before the Parliament in some fixed time. For this Commission of Enquiry Act, 1952 will have to be amended. ● The conduct rules of the government servant in India would have to be modified to prevent them from not sharing the information with public. For this Rule 11 of the Central Civil Service (conduct) Rules, 1964 has to be modified. ● It would have to be mentioned in conduct rules that it is the duty of a government servant to disseminate information and not to restrict it from the public domain. ● Passing of Right to Information Act is not a substitute for administrative reforms. The government processes need to be restricted in a way to promote openness in the government operations and make it the dominant culture of public organizations. ● The public servants at different levels need to be trained in the implementation of this act and in imbibing a culture of openness. ● Provisions should be made to reward those public servants who share information with the public enthusiastically. ● The government policy of classifying the various documents needs to be abandoned. ● Responsibilities should be fixed on the civil servants for the various faults in not sharing information with the citizens. A system should be developed where the civil servants are not able to take shield behind the “principle of anonymity” of civil services. ● For the Right to Information Act to be successful the government needs to develop an effective Management Information System (MIS). Yojna IAS Thus it can be concluded that there is a need of basic reforms in the governance process to make it accountable, open and transparent. The root causes of a culture of corruption, nepotism and secrecy should be struck at rather than just wishing to solve a problem through passing various legislations. A detailed and powerful legislation is a means to achieve an end rather than an end in itself. For their vested interests the political executive or the bureaucracy might be less interested to change this status quo.

31. Civil society organizations will have to take lead in this regard. As goes the adage “Liberty does not descend on people, it has to be fought for”. Yojna IAS