Of Trust Deficit in Governance

Official
website of Govt. of Assam – Public Information Officers (Union Govt.)
– Public Information Officers (Indian Parliament) – Central Information
Commission (CIC) – Directorate of Information & Public Relations
Govt. Of Assam

RTI
Acts & Rules – RTI User’s Guide
– RTI Acts 2005, FAQ (in Assamese)
– RTI Acts 2005, Main Characteristics
(in Assamese)

Of Trust Deficit in Governance

By: R.S. Mooshahary

I N THE COURSE OF my frequent meetings with people, I usually try to ascertain their reaction to issues, which have
a bearing on their day-to-day lives. I listen to them with interest and they soon become quite articulate, though they know
that I cannot mitigate their woes. They are critical of the government�s functioning and cynical about everything in the domain
of public administration. Obviously, there is a grave mismatch between their expectation and the service provided by the
government.

With limited opportunity for earning livelihood and inadequate social facilities, people look up to the government to improve
their quality of life. The role of the government in this state of affairs extends to the whole gamut of their existential
problems. The government is the mai-bap and it needs to conduct as such. However, people are getting increasingly sceptic and
angry that it is making only tall claims about its performance without improving conditions at the ground level.I have rarely
come across anyone who says he is happy with the delivery of public service. People are reluctant to visit any public office,
but they have to, because there is no other alternative and they take it as their misfortune. They say they experience only
frustration and anger when they visit public offices because of prevalent indolence and insensitivity there. They also
complain that public servants have forgotten how to say things with a smile. They only frown and fret about when meeting the
public who have to buy their smile and make them work. True, there are very good public servants � helpful, responsive and
honest � but they are as rare as the blue moons.

People realize that it is not possible for the government to provide jobs to all. However, when they find that some others
are getting public employment by paying bribes or through contacts, they lose trust in government, which in due course leads
to build-up of anti-establishment sentiments. Routinely they see the job vacancies fill up without advertisement, interview or
consideration of merit; the public servants indulging in consumerism beyond their known source of income; and misuse of power
and position. But they do not find anyone who would listen to them and remedy their grievances. All these militate against the
human spirit of justice and equity, and it is but natural to revolt against such a dispensation. In fact, the militancy in the
State is primarily a violent response to the injustice, corruption and exploitation that are continuously alienating the ruled
from the rulers.

It is an irony of democracy that the people who elect the government soon lose their faith in its sincerity to resolve their
problems. The government is largely accountable for this trust-deficit syndrome. People perceive the government to be of and
for the politicians in power and the government servants only. Monies spent in maintaining the government and in bribery will
fully justify this perception. Moreover, many government functionaries themselves lend credence to this view by their anomie
and aggrandizement. The misuse and abuse of authority make people deeply suspicious and, unfortunately, these are a common
happening. As a result, every action of the government becomes questionable and people do not believe that government is good
for anything.

The government here cannot complain that people have developed the CAVE (Citizens against Virtually Everything) syndrome,
which some people in urban areas and in States like Kerala are, because they are much more aware of their rights. People in
Assam are still simple, but it is coming here also. With education and globalization, people all over the world are asserting
their dues and if they cannot get them, they will regard the government as the problem and not the solution. Then we can say
that the government deserves the people it gets to rule. Therefore, it is in the interest of those in power to refine their
tune and play it people-friendly.

The reason why the government generally fails to deliver is the top-down approach to managing things. It is a good management
practice for cohesive organizations where there is clarity in the chain of accountability. The government is a behemoth with
its loosely-knit functioning units spread all over, where accountability is almost absent. The problems at the micro level,
which the policy formulators at the top tend to overlook, kill the best policies. We have abundance of welfare-oriented
schemes conceived and designed by our planners, but their success is totally in the hands of those down below whose capacity
to understand and also the motivation to act on them is low.

One recent example of this is the Mukhyamantrir Jibon Jyoti Bima Achoni under which ICICI- Lombard insured the entire
population of the State against death, disability and hospitalization in 2005-6 for Rs 25 crore. A laudable scheme it was, but
it failed miserably because the plan did not delineate accountability with time limit for settling the claims. It created
delays and difficulties for the claimants and the few who did claim the insurance money had to run from pillar to post,
encountering systemic resistance and indifference everywhere. Many did not claim at all, thinking it was not worth the trouble,
and the insurance company earned a great bonanza at the expense of the State and the people. The scheme would have been a
resounding success had it been executed through bottom-up management strategy eliminating the mishmash at delivery points.

Arrogance and insensitivity bring great unpopularity in governance. In this respect, I would always hold the view, buttressed
by my experience of nearly four decades of government service, that the politicians as a class are not as arrogant as the
bureaucratic class. They are more open to new ideas and do not stand on formalities. I encountered more difficulties with the
bureaucratic cogwheel of arrogance and closed mindset at every level than with the politicians. I experience it in the present
job also. Some time back an additional Chief Secretary, who headed a department, refused to attend a discussion in my office
because of ego problem. This is an attitude emblematic of a class of bureaucrats with great deal of self-importance and
chutzpah, but lacking in commitment to task.

Inaccessibility and irresponsiveness are contrary to the concept of public service, but in all the government offices they
encounter these practices. People want attitudinal correction among the public servants. They expect the government
functionaries to meet and listen to them, to note their manifold woes, and to treat them with a wee bit of understanding and
civility, to tell them how, why and when their work will or will not be done in simple language. This attitude to the
multitude of our population, if consciously practised by our service providers, can bring about a paradigm shift in the state
of governance. It will cost nothing to do it; it just needs a display of human face which all of us inherit, a voice that we
all can make soothing to the ears of the listeners, a smile to assure that the government is for and not against them and a
sense of humour to keep going.

All said and done, it must be stressed here that human beings often require fear of punishment to be good and the government
must not fail to punish the errant employees. The Right to Information Act is precisely intended for this objective. The
government must implement this Act in letter and spirit, and create accountability and responsiveness through transparency and
public audit in governance. It will contain corruption, bridge the hiatus of suspicion, lead to closer interface between the
rulers and the ruled, and help resolve many a problem of the people.

(The writer is Chief Information Commissioner, Asom)