LG: Missing link in Pak governance structure

2026-02-24 - 22:23

WHEN a street stays flooded for weeks, a primary school operates without teacher or a basic health unit lacks medicines, the failure is rarely federal or even provincial in nature. It is local. Pakistan’s governance crisis does not begin in Islamabad or provincial capitals; it begins in neighborhoods, villages and districts where the state’s presence is weakest. Federal-provincial power disputes remain the core of Pakistan’s governance discussions, neglecting the vital need for a strong and operational local government system. Governance, in its true sense, is not merely about authority; it is about the manner in which authority is exercised. It encompasses the principles of the rule of law, transparency, accountability, public service delivery, inclusivity, equality, representation and sustainable development. Sustaining these pillars from afar is unachievable. They necessitate an institutional presence at the foundational administrative levels, such as districts, tehsils and union councils. When this tier falters, is held back or is politically managed, governance appears centralized but operates in a fragmented manner. The Constitution of Pakistan acknowledges the significance of local government. Pakistan’s local government system is enshrined in the 1973 Constitution through Articles 32 and 140-A, which mandate provinces to establish elected local governments and devolve political, administrative and financial authority to them. Local governments are thus a constitutional requirement, not just administrative units. Local governments have been established, abolished, reorganized and abandoned based on political expediency. A stable grassroots governance culture has been prevented by this intermittent existence.Empowered local governments are crucial for upholding the rule of law. Law enforcement and district administration function within provincial structures, typically separate from local accountability. Informal power structures often take over because community dispute resolution is still weak. When local governments fail, undesirable outcomes often follow. A centralized framework hinders transparency. While provincial departments hold sway over budgets and development funding, citizens in districts have scant financial information. Rare occurrences include public hearings, participatory budgeting and community oversight. Where local governments operate effectively, budget talks happen locally, and citizens can directly question their elected officials. This closeness fosters transparency and limits chances for corruption. When local governance is weak, accountability is often the first thing to suffer. Ordinary citizens are geographically and politically distant from provincial ministers and bureaucrats. A voter in a rural area faces practical difficulties in holding a provincial policymaker responsible for a failed water supply project. Conversely, local governments establish direct political accountability. Living amongst their constituents makes electoral accountability tangible, not just symbolic. Pakistan’s public service delivery highlights the structural effects of excessive centralization. Local governments are responsible for sanitation, waste management, primary healthcare, local roads and basic education. However, decisions about these services are frequently made at higher levels, leading to delays, incorrect resource distribution and a focus on urban areas. Rural areas, which are already economically disadvantaged, face increased neglect. Projects are prioritized for political gain, not actual necessity. Inclusivity and representation are equally linked to grassroots governance. Political participation is made accessible to women, minorities and marginalized communities through local government. It is a place where democratic leadership is developed. Democracy stays focused on elites and cities if local councils lack strength. Governance’s vertical concentration prevents a deepening of political inclusion. Development is probably the most important dimension. District-level plans must consider local conditions for balanced national growth. Agricultural districts, industrial towns and remote mountainous areas each grapple with unique difficulties. A uniform provincial approach will not work for such varied circumstances. Proper decentralization empowers districts to address their specific needs, promoting balanced growth. Multiple factors contribute to the structural weakness of local government in Pakistan. Political leaders in provinces frequently hesitate to delegate power to lower levels. Districts have less financial freedom due to fiscal centralization. Elected local officials are limited by bureaucratic control. Comparative experiences offer valuable lessons. The performance-based local governance system of Rwanda, called Imihigo, is remarkable in the developing world. In this system, district administrations enter into performance contracts with the central government, establishing specific development goals that undergo annual public assessment. It has led to greater accountability, better health and education services and improved local administration. Even with limited resources, Rwanda’s example shows that effective local governance for development is achievable through robust monitoring and decentralized, outcome-driven approaches. Continuity is essential for reform to start in Pakistan. The constitution requires local elections to be held at regular intervals. Political decentralization requires fiscal decentralization, including transparent, formula-driven district transfers. Provincial interference should be minimized to ensure a professional local government workforce. By using digital governance, it’s possible to strengthen how complaints are handled and how the public keeps track of things. Local representatives need to be prepared by capacity-building programs to handle planning and budgeting efficiently. Governance is best assessed by how people live in communities, not by policy declarations from the capital. When villages lack clean water, schools are without teachers or roads are unrepaired, the problem extends beyond mere budget constraints. Reforms, even those with good intentions, falter without strong local institutions. Pakistan is at a critical juncture, facing governance issues alongside economic hardship, population growth and societal divisions. Strengthening local government is not a peripheral reform; it is foundational. A democracy without foundational, community-based organizations is not fully realized. To achieve sustainable governance reform, Pakistan must solidify its core. A successful local government system, empowered and accountable, is the key to bridging the gap between the state and its citizens, rather than another federal policy. —The writer is Commoner from 44th Common Educationist — Founder of WHI Institute.based in Sargodha. (waqarhassancsp@gmail.com)