In two of my earlier articles, published in this newspaper, I made reference to the diminishing power of local governments as a result of recent centralization moves by the central government.
I have also opined that the basis for the decentralization process in Botswana is the allocation of responsibilities to local governments without necessarily matching that with devolution of powers to decide on the how, when, and what to deliver.
That is to say decentralization of responsibilities and functions without decentralization of power. The government is currently “consulting” district, town and city councils on its intended move to change the Act(s) of Parliament under whose provision the three are not only created but also have their responsibilities spelt out.
It is this move that I want to briefly reflect on and argue that this is a substantial reversal of the decentralization processes we have embarked on for quite some time now.
The key components of the new initiative are firstly, to change the tenure of office for Mayors/Council Chairpersons from the current 2 years to 4 years. Whilst, this is not necessarily a bad move, it needs further reflection on the implications for our local governments’ democratic processes. I would like to believe that there are positives to this move that includes affording local government leaders to initiate and see through their programmes and probably matching the period with the electoral one.
The only caveat one would throw in here is the need to put in place mechanisms through which those that may rock the boat can be recalled by the “decision making body” at the local level and not central government. There are insinuations that in the proposed amendment of the Act, the Mayors and Council Chairpersons could actually be appointees of the Head of State or his representative with delegated authority to do so. If this is indeed the route we are taking, I would argue it’s a retrogressive move in so far as the virtues and efficacy of the benefits and rewards of any decentralization process.
Secondly, the new amendment seeks to give the minister responsible the powers to dissolve a district, town or city council, presumably under and after careful consideration of any factors that may pertain at the given moment.
This is a smack in the face of electoral democracy, councilors are elected by their wards and that alone gives them the tag of representatives of the people and if anybody is qualified to send them packing at any given time it’s the electorates and not a minister. I cannot for once reconcile this move with all the efforts that have been pursued by international bodies, governments (including ours) and local governments the world over, pursuing and identifying decentralization as a necessary component of democratic practices and good governance.
Incidentally, throughout most of his tenure as President of the Botswana Association of Local Authorities (BALA), the current Assistant Minister of Local Governments was known to be an advocate of empowering local authorities through decentralization of powers in addition to functions.
How ironic is it that as minister responsible for local governments he is the one currently touring the country to explain not only the new changes as they stand but also the need and rationale for this new centralization of powers away from local governments.
This is the same person who a few years ago at the Press conference of the United Cities on Local Governments of Africa (UCLGA), lamented the fact that local governments are currently operating as mere divisions of ministries of local government with very limited decision making powers. Could it be that the Assistant Minister has since seen things differently after securing a cabinet position or he is caught in the dilemma of implementing a cabinet position even though he may have not agreed with it?
Either way, his former constituency at BALA must be wondering as to whether they here him right as he goes around the country addressing them on this new developments.
I would like to believe that they were so happy and hopeful when he was appointed to a cabinet position, with the anticipation that his voice and commitment to the decentralization process would be more heard from within the annals of power, I feel for your disappointment.
It is quite apparent that this new centralization move will further reduce any powers that local governments had and turn them into entities with more responsibilities and functions but less and seemingly diminishing powers. If we put this into further perspective, it is evident that the old arrangement had local governments been creations of the legislature or parliament through the current Act(s) and under the new arrangement they will now be more under the executive than the legislature.
This means that when the President or his appointee exercise their duties to dissolve any district, town or city council, they need not inform parliament as the main legislative organ of the country and one can only hope (against all odds) that this will not be an affront on democratic practices and the entrenchment of good governance in our country.
I am hoping the likes of BALA and their sister organizations will as a matter of urgency reflect on this new amendments and at least point out the negative effects it is going to have on any move to further empower the local governments in Botswana.
As alluded to in one of my earlier pieces the world over has embraced decentralization as fundamental to governments’ pursuit of, not only effective and efficient service delivery, but also, key towards the realization of good governance that has value and democratic virtue at local, national and international levels.
I still am not convinced of what informed the current move and our exercise of rationality guided by what we have adopted in some aspects as best practices within the field of public service reforms and more importantly within current trends in local government reforms.
A key component of these reforms at both levels is further decentralization particularly that of powers. We do have a right to be different and to our own unique policies, but I doubt if we are different in this regard, for me it’s a retrogressive move.
