In 1992, when the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (CAA)came into existence, the local bodies and municipalities were accorded the constitutional status. Post that,the issue of devolution of powers to Mayors and their representation in the governance structure of Indian urban regions has taken centre stage. As per the 7th Schedule of Indian Constitution, “local government” is a state subject, making it the discretion of state governments to decide on the aspects of local governance. This explains why the Mayor in Mumbai is indirectly elected for 2.5 years, while the one in Bhopal is directly elected for 5 years.
Mayors in India have been regularly demanding for the effective and universal implementation of the 74th CAA. It guides the basis of governance at the local level in cities, but is patchy in implementation. A Mayor is considered as the ‘Chief Executive’ of affairs in a municipal corporation. When a region faces some civic crisis, people look at their local elected representative. In a democracy, what makes a leader deliver his duties effectively? May be the fear of losing the seat in the next round of elections, which means they are accountable to the people. For this reason, the different methods of election of mayors in different states has been questioned by experts.
Direct election is the key?
In India, except some states like Haryana, Jharkhand, and Uttar Pradesh, all others conduct indirect election of Mayors. The representative of people at the very local level is not directly elected ‘by’ the people. Citizens elect their councillors and then they select their leader as the city Mayor. As a result, such representatives do not resonate with the local public and it creates a leadership gap. When people elect their representative, he/she is directly accountable to them which acts as a motivation for the elected representative to work for the development of the region.
Since Shashi Tharoor, Member of Parliament, Thiruvananthapuram, initiated a private members bill in the Parliament in 2016, demanding direct elections and strengthening of Office of Mayor, it has been discussed time and again, but any substantial step towards it is still pending. Various global cities with directly elected powerful Mayors are presenting great example of leadership. For instance, Michael Bloomberg, Former Mayor of New York City, has various feathers in his cap ranging from public health initiatives, improving and encouraging non-motorised mass transit system, to boosting scientific research and industry in New York.
Even with such examples, whether the direct elections for the position of Mayors would have any fruitful outcome is questionable. Even in India, states like Bihar have the provision for direct elections but few would argue that they perform differently. To know more about this, Team Urban Update talked to Tikender Panwar, Former Deputy Mayor, Shimla. He said, “Holding direct elections for the post of Mayor is not that important. What’s more important is to strengthen the institution of Mayors by creating a bureaucratic setup which is accountable to Mayor, considering that he/she is the Chief Executive in a city.”
Eroding powers
With time, the authorities and powers of local body heads have been diminishing as they are dependent on state and central governments. The constitution of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) for Smart Cities Mission is one such initiative which raised the question of community representation in it. Smart Cities Mission follows a model where Commissioners are most of the time the CEOs of the mission in cities. The board of directors which assists these SPVs are represented by both state government, and local public utility providing agencies, but there is no role of people’s representatives in a scheme with more than `6000 crores of budgetary allocation, this year.
Adding to this, Panwar said, “The constitution of SPVs for the mission has robbed the Mayors of whatever little power they had.” He added that the local bodies should act as independent units with an independent head, which represents local people. They should have full control over basic civic services in their region such as water, and sanitation, he added.
During the pandemic, imagine if the Mayors of cities kept stock of the situation, and talked to people regularly on the health emergency and solutions, rather than some official of central government sitting far away, then with whom would people resonate more? People look up to a leader with whom they can meet, talk and share their problems. May be the situation of panic in cities would have been managed better, if the local leaders were present among the people to listen to their woes and assist them.
Conclusion
Strengthening the leadership at the very local level is important to empower local governments and improve the governance of ULBs. Mayors are an important cog in the wheel of governance and the central and states governments should move towards strengthening their position so that people find a leader in them, which comes from the same place as they do. The concept of Mayor-in-Council or Chairperson-in-Council, which is already adopted by various cities across the world, should be considered and adopted in India to empower the local leader.
Mayor-in-Council model of Kolkata Municipal Corporation
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation, like in few other cities of India, presents a fine example which promotes the model of ‘Strong Mayor’. As per the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, there should be a Mayor-in-Council comprising the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and ten other councillors, which will be nominated by the Mayor. The Council acts as the local body cabinet of the Mayor just like the cabinet at the Centre. This model presents a fine example for other state governments to follow in order to strengthen the institution of Mayor. The city is doing well in multiple sectors, whether it is providing filtered drinking water to the people of Kolkata, speedy vaccination coverage, or preventing water wastage by marking zones and sensitising people.
Various other countries such as the United States, and the United Kingdom use similar structure of council of Mayor, which acts as the decision-making body at the local level as well as empowering the Mayor. Some states in India such as Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu also experimented with this model but it was soon taken back, owing to political tussles. Various city leaders in India have demanded similar structure in all Indian cities and it is high time to strengthen the government and leaders at the city level.