Report to PRIA on CIVIL SOCIETY & GOVERNANCECase Study of CIVIC, BangalorebySubbarayan Prasanna, Sanjeev Aundhe & Leo Saldanha

Introduction

This section will articulate:

The issues of urban governance in Bangalore and relate the same to the constitutional framework and polity - like, lack of transparency, accountability, improper dissemination of information etc. Most of this will be derived from the paper already written and submitted to PRIA. But need to be put in a perspective that provides a context for CIVIC to address these.In addition, this section will articulate the existing and emerging conditions of the local polity. It will cover the options of local government doctrines, namely, the Ripon Doctrine as against the Mayo Doctrine. It will delineate the legal and institutional status of the local government and the desired lines of evolution as envisioned by the 74th Amendment. The section will also set the problem perspective of the developments in Bangalore vis-à-vis the national context.

The way these issues are being addressed by civil society in Bangalore (besides CIVIC)

Issues of Urban Governance

The gap between precepts and performance

The issues of urban governance in Bangalore may be summarized in a few words and phrases. They are not very different from similar issues in the rest of the country. On the one hand we have a textual framework of the polity and the constitution that is democratic participatory and egalitarian. It specifies even some fundamental duties of the citizen parallel to the fundamental rights. On the other hand we have a performing polity, bureaucracy and citizenry that play a different kind of game in the contextual mode. Essentially, the gap between the two has aggravated the cleavage between the civil society's changing expectations and the empirical performance of the urban governance.

Lack of participation

The common ills of the urban community and governance can be enunciated in terms contrary to what is specified in the Constitutional framework as well as the court interpreted legal doctrines and accepted principles of public administration. They include, the lack of transparency, the lack of accountability, and a lack of participatory governance leading to the negation of the Constitutional specification on the fundamental duties as well as the mandatory and the hortatory specifications of the state legislation and the Parliamentary statutes. These issues stem mostly from the necessity and the process of identifying the public interest and the response through governance to the same in the interests of equity.

Neutral & responsive competence

1

Modern administrative theory specifies two sets of criteria for good performance in a democratic society. One deals with the traditional idioms of "neutral" competence; the other deals with the evolutionary idiom of "responsive" competence. In the fast changing urban milieu in India the governance has failed by both criteria sets. The neutral competence, much glorified in the Victorian Era and its hang over years, has failed because of the corruption and deterioration in the system in its ability to deal with the demands of an increasing population and its growing aspirations. The responsive competence on the other hand never took off the ground as systems to deal with aspirations and demands of the evolving urban community were not developed adequately.

The doctrines of local governance

We may leave aside the temporal and empirical aberrations of corruption and other non-rational forms of performance for the time being. Then we may look at the problem of local governance in terms of two summary doctrines. Nearly a hundred years ago they were enunciated by Lord Ripon and Lord Mayo who were Viceroys of India.

Ripon advocated an emphasis on popular participation for the evolution of local government. He believed in the nation building and institutional aspects of the long-term evolution. Towards that end he was willing to tolerate temporary inadequacies and inefficiency of the erring learning local population. He urged states and provinces to desist exercising bureaucratic control over the local councils and their budgets.

On the other hand, Mayo came on very strongly in favour of efficiency in local administration. He was not concerned about the evolution or nation building aspects of the local government. He was excessively concerned about how the money was being spent. He used the term "Imperial Treasury" and advocated the unburdening of the same by the local governments. He directed that local populations should be made to pay for the governmental services rendered them by the civil services of the states and the provinces. In addition, the civil services of the states and provinces bore a responsibility to oversee the local governments as to their efficiency.

This debate between opposing points of view on local governments has been continuing in India ever since the days of Ripon and Mayo. The modern equivalents though are made of phrases, such as, managerial and administrative efficiency as against socio-political evolution. The debate went on and deteriorated into manipulative reductionism when the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution of India were passed and followed up with the mandatory state legislation.

The ill-defined means-state

Anther important aspect of these issues is the large gap between the emphases on the ends and means of governance. The ends of governance are often articulated in terms of plan and development targets. The means to be employed are rarely articulated. Often, the means are taken for granted or left undefined. In the best of conditions, the means fall back on the premises of the inherent powers of the state. Thus magisterial methods are often resorted to rather than any form of modern democratic participation and evolution. Thus the process of decision making suffers obfuscation, frequently. In most cases, one cannot comprehend the process easily. This is not merely a question of transparency.

2

Even in genuine open processes the system is not defined clearly and designed in a competent manner. It fails to enhance the dissemination of relevant information, comprehension and therefore fails to induce participation by the citizenry.

Summary

In this section we discussed the problems in the context of interaction between civil society and the local government. We mentioned five broad items essentially, as (1) those of the gap between precepts and performance, (2) the lack of participatory evolution, (3) the absence of responsive competence in local administration, (4) the dilemma of doctrines between efficiency and evolution, and (5) the ill-defined means-state. One may find problems related to items (1) and (4) in any society. They often form a part of the dynamics of evolution and need not be a retarding influence, necessarily.

Summarily, the problems listed above are not peculiar to Bangalore. They hold true for all cities and local government jurisdictions in India. By tradition and inclination Karnataka follows the Mayo doctrine. Even after the 74th Amendment the state's civil service continues hold an iron grip over the local government administration. The state has opted for a weak Mayor system and appoints its chosen bureaucrat to the post of the Commissioner. Despite some provisions in the state's follow up legislation to the 74th Amendment the erosion of local autonomy continues.

Methodology

Personal observation of the research team through years of interaction and participation in CIVIC activities.

Interviews with people involved with the initiatives at various points of time like- CIVIC members, government officials

Printed materials

Methodology of the study

The team of researchers in this study have experienced long years of association with CIVIC. They have interacted with and participated in many of CIVIC's initiatives and campaigns. Thus a lot of the reporting and analysis will bear their primary imprint. The approach to the study is that of a case problem. It is reported in a narrative style with some analysis in a qualitative framework.

To cover the empirical ground the researchers interviewed several participants and observers of CIVIC's initiatives over the years. The results of these interviews embellish the analysis by adding third party perceptions to primary ones of the researchers.

Other resources included the many files in CIVIC's office from the past as well as those in the files of the researchers themselves. Some printed material was also available in the form of CIVIC Newsletters, pamphlets and newspaper reports.

Some of the pre-suppositions of the empirical context were outlined in the section on introduction.

3

It may be pointed out further that we looked at CIVIC in its interventionist role. We have also analysed CIVIC's organisational context as appropriate to that role.

Without getting too theoretical we have culled out an organisational hypothesis that CIVIC set for itself. It is highlighted in its relationships with the internal and external environment. Thus we deal simultaneously with organisational evolution and organisational intervention in the empirical context. We perceive that there are lessons to be learnt and wisdom abstracted that can be applied elsewhere.

Short Overview of the Case

The 74th amendment and key governance issues relating to the 74th amendment :decentralization in local government, (2) policy formulation, planning and evaluation with citizen participation, and (3) the evolution of a meaningful and responsive local governance system. CIVIC initiative in the context of 74th amendment and the significance of that initiative. (Need to be mentioned briefly. It will be dealt with in details in the subsequent discussion)

An overview of the case study

CIVIC is an organisation of citizens in voluntary initiative for the improvement of the city. Its organisational nature is different from the common perception associated with that of the typical NGO. It started with a zero establishment base and continues to remain that way. CIVIC refused to develop a credo in the conventional sense by way of a focus of concerns, lobbies, platforms or positions.Its main concern was to increase the democratic content of the policy process and governance in the community. It welcomed pluralism in its initiatives and interactions, deliberately. It sought to provide a forum of discussion for the articulation of a variety of issues in an inclusive manner. CIVIC articulated its goals formally, by listing the following.

(1) Establish a People's Movement without excessive funding and organisational structure but with a wide membership that builds cross sectoral networks (particularly of NGOs and CBOs) and initiates campaigns for increasing public awareness;

(2) Break existing information blocks by developing information sources and disseminate information;

(3) Create greater accountability and transparency in the public administration by lobbying for change on important issues by pressing for or organising public hearings on major developments and public projects.

CIVIC included invited and encouraged people from a variety of backgrounds and pursuits. They were benign and vested, ideological and materialistic, leftist, centrist and rightist as well as ascetic at the same time. Thus, in CIVIC sponsored meetings and gatherings one could find the businessman entrepreneur of organised industry, the committed labour union person, the benign social worker, the involved slum activist, as well as the voyeur, the professional and the academic, exchanging views with the political elite and the under-dog.

4

That was CIVIC's strength in its waxing days. It also became its weakness in its waning days. A harsher criticism of CIVIC opines that it ended up doing nothing for anybody while seeking to provide a forum for all on every kind of interest. On the brighter side, it has remained a forum and has continued to redefine its role in a fast changing milieu, seeking new horizons.

CIVIC's trustees as well as co-opted associates have pursued a number of initiatives on its behalf. However, as an organisation CIVIC has refused to be bogged down by any of the particular set of interests.

In this paper we report an assessment of one of the initiatives of CIVIC as a voluntary organisation, that is, an agent of civil society. Its efforts in the public realm dealt with the goal of increasing participatory governance.

In the next section, we provide a background history highlighting the significant phases of CIVIC's evolution. We follow that with a discussion on CIVIC's attitude and the environment of operation. We highlight the problems inherent in its internal environment and how it inhibited or enabled the external interactions.

Later, we present a set of the initiatives pursued by CIVIC in capsule form. These initiatives provide essential lessons of experience for the evolution of CIVIC and similar organisations. In the last section, we provide an assessment of CIVIC in its operational milieu. We also summarise in the form of tabulation how several role players perceived its initiatives and its perspective in the context of civil society and governance.

Background of CIVIC

Nature of CIVIC- What type of organisation it is? What is the kind of membership it has- profile of people involved at various points of time.

Development of CIVIC and its evolution.

CIVIC's mode of intervention.

(The sections upto here to be about 3-4 pages in length).

The background of CIVIC effort

In this section we report on the evolutionary phases of CIVIC's formation. It is not a chronological account. It is a narrative of a continuum of significant phases. We present the same in this fashion, as we believe it is appropriate to the theme of intervention in this case study. CIVIC's action with the external environment was conditioned to a great extent by its organisational modes and framework. Some segments of these phases overlapped with each other and did not run successively one after another. Broadly, there were three phases of evolution. The first phase was that of foundation. The second was one of comprehension and specialisation in applied learning. The third phase is focused on organisation and development.

It is questionable whether there was any organisational learning. But the members and associates of CIVIC had to learn by virtue of their pursuing the activities of these phases.

5

In our assessment the last phase still continues to pose serious questions to CIVIC in regard to items of resources, means, choice and priority. These are items on which CIVIC members are working now.

Responding to growth problems

The late 1980s and the1990s witnessed a marked change in the common perceptions of Bangalore. People were accustomed to thinking of this city as a salubrious environment, a garden city and an abode to retire, etc. Hectic growth caused drastic changes in these perceptions. This led to the formation of many citizens' movements in the early 1990s.

The nucleus for the formation of CIVIC was laid down in one such meet held in the Max Mueller Bhavan. The then Director of the Bhavan, Heiko Sievers, was the host of the meeting that laid the foundation for the core of CIVIC. Its essential aim was to promote people's participation in the administration of the city. The core group of citizens met every week over coffee at the Max Mueller Bhavan and formulated their initiatives.

The first landmark effort was in April 1992; an "open house" session was held to discuss the municipal budget. Following that CIVIC inducted a paid co-ordinator to organise its work. The core group comprised some thirteen citizens who decided on the initiatives and activities. A major event that year was a two-day seminar on "Bangalore Today" sponsored by and held in the Max Mueller Bhavan.

Mr Sievers was an enthusiast of Bangalore in his early days as Director of the Bhavan. Over the years he perceived the deterioration of the city and was moved to do something about it. His official work at the Bhavan also required and enabled a cultural role. Thus, he combined the two and obtained some resources for these efforts. But for his supportive efforts CIVIC may not have been able to pursue many of its pioneering activities.

Middle class seminars

The seminar on "Bangalore Today" was given wide publicity in the local media, and through the distribution of pamphlets and posters. The response by way of participation and enthusiasm was good; but it was confined to the middle and elite professional classes of people. CIVIC identified the issues of public transportation and city planning as the main issues of concern, as there were other groups actively involved in items, such as, solid waste management and the like.

It was about this time that CIVIC also took stock of its resources and decided that it would concentrate on the process of planning and participation rather than getting involved in any materialistic operations. We may note that every activity, at this time, was sponsored by some organisation other than CIVIC. A monthly sponsor paid the salary of the first co-ordinator, the initial months being taken care of by the Bhavan. Their commitment came to an end in April 1993.Thus resource raising became an important question.

A membership drive was launched to attract a wider public. This was done to an extent in addition to getting people to sponsor events, campaigns, and the Newsletter publication. The drive targeted students, the working age groups and senior citizens. However, they continued to be of the middle class. Neither the rich corporate entrepreneurs nor

6

businessmen, nor the representatives of the poorer income groups were attracted to CIVIC.

Attitudes & Environment

The above discussed attitudes of the formative days had their own influence on CIVIC's operational concepts. We discuss and derive the working hypothesis of CIVIC from this phase by conjecture and digested primary observations. We allow, even now, that such a hypothesis was never articulated at any time formally in any of the CIVIC meetings and deliberations. It is our perception based on a number of primary observations at several meets of CIVIC members and periodic reviews. We state the same below in the framework suggested by the PRIA Research Workshop.

In a similar way, we provide a brief conception of CIVIC's interactions with the internal and external environments. We have prototyped the different role players and their provenience by way of comprehending the basic attitudes. We have not identified their exact names and social positions.

The working hypothesis of CIVIC

The Research Workshop of PRIA, May 21-22, 1999, defined some four basic dimensions for the case studies. They were listed as,Modernisation and discontent,Pro-poor aspects,Idea of citizenship, andExpanded concept of governance.

In our assessment, CIVIC focused on item 3 (idea of citizenship) for its basic working hypothesis. It used item 4 (expanded concept of governance) as a corollary to that. It subsumed items 1 and 2 as either assumptions or transient variables. As a result, CIVIC treated all the participants in its forums as citizens playing different roles assigned by and positioned in the society.

We mentioned earlier that CIVIC was formed by middle class professionals. There were no social worker types who actually worked "with the poor". There were one or two who worked "for the poor" in the slum-related issues, but they did not bring up any issues up to the common forum of CIVIC. Among the members of CIVIC there were not any applied anthropologists or social activists in the conventional sense who would have played "the agent of change", such as in community development. Thus, issues of modernisation and discontent or conflict resolution were not highlighted in the CIVIC forums, except by way of benign recognition.

The internal environment

CIVIC was formed by a few well-meaning professional people of both sexes from different walks of life. The diversity of their provenience was circumscribed by their middle-class existence. It did not include the rich, or the lower classes. This is not a criticism, but is a fact to be reckoned with and is typical of most voluntary organisations. CIVIC's blessing is that it was founded by professionals from a wide variety of pursuits, ethnic origins, and the like. Many of them were not even old time Bangaloreans but were new to the city.

7

Typically one could list some seven categories of people who were among founders and co-opted members of CIVIC. The following would cover the range.

The professional,The NGO social workerThe retired social uplifterThe wealthier sponsorThe leftist and the neo-leftistThe 'fringie' type, andThe businessman/entrepreneur

The conflict and co-operation dynamics among the above can be well imagined. The businessman type wanted CIVIC to develop some spirit of enterprise and build up an establishment with a good supply of resources (fund raising) and productivity. On the other hand, the 'fringie' types wanted CIVIC to remain as a low establishment organisation with emphasis on spontaneity. The professionals and others found themselves in the middle range with a rational pursuit of issues and projects based on the available resources.

By hindsight, one may observe that the middle range people were also the only ones who took the initiative to develop projects, pursue issues and other efforts in CIVIC. In each initiative a sponsor or sponsors were enthused to support the effort. At the end of each project CIVIC would be left with no resources or establishment, and would get back to square one. This kind of zero-base to zero-end operational cycle was typical of CIVIC's efforts through the years.

The external environment

In the initial years, CIVIC had not defined a self-image except for some vague ideas of voluntarism (almost a Jacksonian form of persuasion!), democratic attitudes, and participatory governance. Some of the dominant founders kept articulating a refrain that "the best way to kill a voluntary organisation is to give it a lot of money." It was as if they wanted CIVIC to remain a poor and low level organisation that would come together only for a worthy cause and a movement.

There was a bit of hypocrisy in this too. Because, in the other part of their lives, the same vociferous ones were very high-priced professionals who sent their children to the most expensive schools in the city and pursued equivalent life-style items.

What started thus as a kind of 'social club' of disinterested volunteers has gradually come to include and co-opt many active people. The latter were involved with specific efforts on a project by project basis. Over the years, it can be said that CIVIC has cared to interact with the state and local government agencies, other citizen organisations in Bangalore and the smaller towns of Karnataka, and some funding agencies and organisations of the UN. CIVIC has been shy of developing positive socially oriented relationships with business houses, and industrial enterprises and organisations. CIVIC has also not been interactive with institutions such as schools, hospitals, collegiate organisations and the like in any significant manner. This is not a criticism of CIVIC but an observation related its deployment of resources and organisational means.

8

Case Study in Detail (include all the sections below)

1. Context: Describe the three key governance issues cited in the overview, in detail.

2. Nature of Interface with Governance: The 74th Amendment & the Campaign This will provide the case study in detail in the framework required by PRIA. Please do remember the caveat that CIVIC is not an ‘issue-centric’ organization and that its efforts are ‘process centric’. Below, we are providing the sub-titles to the narrative of the case study of this campaign. Per the caveat above you may not be able to derive issue-specific inferences from this study.

The early meetings Liaison with other citizens’ organizations The citizens’ workshop on the Nagara Palika Act Recommendations to the state government Meetings with the Urban Development & Local Administration departments TRF effort and the public hearing The national conference on the 74th Amendment Beginning efforts with the Ward Committee Testimony to the GOK Commission Change of Government Contrary positions between Ripon and Mayo doctrines Ward Committee & the Swabhimana initiatives

Kindly note the followings:

Each point mentioned above is to be elaborated with detail information.

Who were the people who came to these meetings?

How did CIVIC convince people to attend the meetings?

Was there always consensus or agreement among the people or there were instances of disagreement and conflict? If there were disagreements, what were the consequences?

Reaction and response of government officers and bureaucrats to CIVIC initiative?

Was there any interaction with the political parties?

The build-up to the 74th Amendment

The context

The decentralisation issue can be considered in two ways broadly. One deals with the mechanisms of service extension and delivery systems. The other consists of the evolutionary rationale by which the organism would take roots among the people, where

9

they are and where they want to go. In both cases there is an intervening variable in the form a political bureaucracy combined with its civil service tail.

To a large extent we assume that the intervening variable is a ‘black box’ and try to overcome its process constraints by jumping to reach the policy formulation in puts. The first approach of evolution believes that by attacking the inputs directly the civil society can soften and sensitise the black box to suit its needs. Over time such sensitisation would bring about a transformation in the nature of the black box itself. This is the idiom of evolution in local governance. It takes an organism (organismic) view of local government and society.

The second view assumes that the black box has its own rationale for existence and performance. The bureaucracy is necessary in order to maintain efficacy and secure efficiency and equity in the delivery systems. Without that system in the control mode the distribution would become spontaneous and unregulated. And those unregulated flows will destroy the system of governance, eventually.

It is assumed that civil society seeks to bridge the gap between these perceptions by helping the citizens develop a demand rationale systematically and present the same to the black box to sensitise its delivery and extension systems. Through that modern civil society would also help transform the black box to make it more transparent and responsive.

Policy formulation, planning & evaluation with citizen participation

What we described in the last paragraph is the age-old debate about the bureaucracy set in the classic David Easton type of black box model. Policy formulation, planning and evaluation become more complex in empirical contexts, especially in complex and stratified societies such as ours. For example, we may consider the three basic dimensions of social relevance, administrative competence, and the public capacity to evaluate and respond.

Social relevance is high when there is a high public effort at designing the programmes of policy and governance. In most of our environments that criterion of public design measures very low. Similarly, the public capacity to evaluate and respond to programmes and policies is also very low. Thus the hope is placed on the governmental bureaucracy and the NGOs to compensate for the shortcomings on both basic dimensions mentioned. Often, the bureaucracy and the NGOs respond with a really ‘compensatory attitude’. The bureaucracy makes ‘utopian’ (set far away in space/time) plans and the NGOs often exaggerate their claims or indulge in ‘chiliastic’ (now or never type of ) demands, in the words of Karl Mannheim. This problem can be overcome only by developing a consensus seeking and rational attitude on the part of the citizens.

Evolution of meaningful & responsive local governance

Some efforts had been made in the various parts of the country during the early decentralisation phases of the nineteen fifties and sixties to bring governance and /or response to the people. Similarly some urban areas decentralised their administrative service centres to extend delivery by developing local zonal offices. These experiments have been functional but limited. They have not expanded either in quality or in quantity to other functions. Thus some cities collect taxes in local neighbourhood offices, issue

10

building permits in zonal offices, hold standing committee meetings in different zones and sometimes even hold public hearings for local improvement of services.Such efforts had not happened in Bangalore.

The nature of interface with governance

It may be noted that interaction with the public was something alien to the government officials in Karnataka, except in the magisterial forms of administration. Such forms were traditionally nurtured in the Revenue Department and the District Collectorate. They never percolated to the policy-making modes of governance. This has been so despite the fact that the Town & Country Planning Act and other similar state legislation called for public hearings and active participation of the people in plan and policy formulation. Such participation is also mandatory in regard to any proposed changes in existing infrastructure, such as the diversion of a road, the construction of new bridge or pertaining to any major changes in landforms and topographic features.

In the forty odd years since the Independence almost no public hearing or equivalent has been held in Bangalore. The bureaucrats were thus rather reluctant to interact in any open forum such as the ones that CIVIC would help convene. CIVIC pushed for this kind of interaction consistently. CIVIC members took the initiative in highlighting the legislative provisions on public participation and their mandatory nature. Even senior executives of the state, lawyers, judges of the High Court were unaware or insensitive to these provisions of law. CIVIC members wrote papers interpreting the law as applicable to public decision making. These papers were presented and distributed to many civil service executives of the state and local authorities. Later, CIVIC members even wrote the legal briefs for lawyers who helped litigate some cases in the public interest on behalf of CIVIC and other NGOs.

Late 1992 and early 1993 were significant months for CIVIC’s own education. The Metro rail project proposal was before the State Government. But very few people knew what it was about. The state bureaucracy and the political leadership kept it under cover. They refused to share these with the public in any meaningful manner. CIVIC spent some eight months meeting and gathering experts on the subject. CIVIC managed to organise a public debate on the Metro idea and persuaded the Cabinet Minister in-charge to urge the Bangalore Development Authority and associated government departments to take part in the discussion. This was the first-ever public interface effort that took place in Bangalore on a major urban project, even before the plans were made.

Nothing materialistic was achieved in this phase of efforts. However, one could perceive easily the level of confidence built up among the members of CIVIC. The motivation in general induced more people to become members of CIVIC. But the total number remained small (a few hundreds) compared to the size of the urban community. The constant theme of this phase was that we needed to do something. The resources, means, capabilities and specific priority of ends were not clear in this phase. It was a phase of limited probes and a low level of resolution.

Comprehension & Specialisation

In the next phase CIVIC members plunged into a number of issues. They took individual leads and came round to discussing them with one another and the group as a whole. Thus, the interfaces among the different lead efforts evolved some natural teamwork.

11

This happened in spite of the lack of a formal organisation or any commitment of resources.

The 74th Amendment to the Constitution was a watershed in the evolution of CIVIC. There was work to be done by the state legislature regarding the follow up legislation. It was due to be completed by mid 1996. There was very little communication on this between the state and the public in Karnataka State. CIVIC pursued this initiative in a very comprehensive manner. More volunteers and observers joined the informal meetings and discussions organised by CIVIC during these days. A sense of CIVIC pressure thus seemed to develop.

The one-day workshop

It started with a one-day workshop held at the Indian Social Institute, Bangalore, organised in association with a number of NGO representatives, journalists and other citizens. The workshop came up with a comprehensive set of recommendations in regard to the state legislation that would be called the Nagara Palika Act, later. The 74th Amendment had started with an enthusiastic set of items for wholesale decentralisation. The functional responsibilities of the urban local governments were identified in the 12th Schedule by way of 18 different dimensions of policy and executive action. Most of the states got panicky at this, fearing that they might lose all their powers of patronage. So they had made every effort to dilute the 74th Amendment’s mandatory provisions into options that the state legislation would decide upon and had left the rest as vague as possible. The 12th Schedule was left as a set of suggestions without specifying any minimum mandatory parameters.

Relating to other citizen organisations

CIVIC highlighted the above shortcomings in this workshop. More workshops and meetings were held in association with citizen organisations in Mysore, Davangere, and Mangalore. A few more meetings and conferences were held in Bangalore with visiting citizens from the mofussil towns of Karnataka. It was about this time that CIVIC also started its Newsletter.

The national conference

Among the best initiatives of CIVIC on this subject were (1) a national conference on the 74th Amendment sponsored by Max Mueller Bhavan, and (2) a public hearing on the provisions for the impending state legislation. CIVIC even managed to get the State Government’s Department of Urban Development and Local Administration to pay for the expenses of the public hearing effort. The national conference comprised some distinguished participants from different walks of life, different regions of India, and a scholar and a consultant from Germany. About a dozen research and position papers were presented on the subject.

The public hearing

The public hearing effort was not as successful as the conference. Firstly, the idea of a public hearing was new (it still is!) to the people. Secondly, the interest in the subject is not that great among the people. Thirdly, the idea of converting the interest into a process

12

to influence legislation is beyond the comprehension of most people. Fourthly, the state bureaucracy was rather reluctant to share any kind of thinking on the subject from its internal environment.

Working with the legislation

The state legislature was to meet a deadline in mid 1996 to pass the legislation. But the administration was inclined to continue the status quo, and not really give into the spirit of the 74th Amendment. So the state appointed the Times Research Foundation as their consultants to do the chore by them. The TRC people were also present at the hearing. But they would not reveal any of their deliberations to the public. The state bureaucrats were most reluctant to part with any information. They would not respond to suggestions or provocation either. Thus the public hearing ended in a stonewalling session by the representatives of the state.

This was a great revelation for the CIVIC members and other citizens. They found that their ability to influence decision-making was rather limited. They also learnt during these days that the state government paid the TRC consultants a sum of around Rupees forty-five lakhs. Similar sums were paid by four other states to TRC to do similar confidential (secretive) consultant’s work. The aim was to ward off any changes; and, word the new legislation with the same old provisions. The same ruling party was in power in all those states and the Union when these contracts were awarded.

Eventually, CIVIC submitted its own set of recommendations to the state government. By late 1996 the ruling party was on its way out. And a new legislature was formed. The new government appointed a commission to review the Act after receiving testimony from citizens. CIVIC presented its papers and testimony to this commission. This kind of revision effort took place about three times. CIVIC volunteered with its positions and testimony on various aspects of the law, decentralisation and citizen preferences. Some partial success can be attributed to CIVIC’s sustained efforts in regard to the formation Ward Committees and their citizen oriented functions. In recent times, the Ward Committees have been formed operationally in Bangalore.

Public recognition

During this period of the exercises on the 74th Amendment CIVIC began to be recognized by a number of people. Smaller cities in Karnataka started similar volunteer groups of their own. Some invited CIVIC members to come and discuss things with them. Civil service bureaucrats were divided between those who would co-operate with CIVIC and those who kept a distance from it. CIVIC members started speaking directly to the state cabinet ministers and began securing their participation in CIVIC organised public meetings and hearings on urban issues. Other organisations such as the Senior Citizens’ Forum, other NGOs, and environmental groups began co-operative efforts with CIVIC. One such effort was focused on saving the children’s theatre “Bal Bhavan” in Cubbon Park from being demolished. CIVIC co-operated with the BET (Bangalore Environment Trust) in fighting the case through the court, successfully. Another effort focused on the housing project for the national sports meet participants in a sensitive marshland that was designated as park and open space in the Comprehensive Plan.

The ESCAP induction

13

CIVIC attracted the notice of ESCAP, Bangkok at this time. Three programme promotion people from ESCAP visited CIVIC and reviewed its work for three days. They offered to support CIVIC for one year in its development as a model urban forum in the ESCAP region. Some reports on the CIVIC model were presented in various ESCAP conferences. Again, one of the earlier mentioned inhibitions of CIVIC’s internal environment was to stifle the fulfilment of this potential. When ESCAP was offering the resources to support CIVIC one of the “fringe” members of CIVIC stood out and opposed any large grant. He protested that CIVIC would turn down any offer of a big dollar sum as grant. This kind of grandstanding appalled many members who had worked hard to bring up CIVIC as well as get the attention of ESCAP and other similar organisations. Finally, ESCAP gave a nominal grant of $ 15,000 and hoped that would be a beginning. Ironically, the three officials who came for the review spent more money on their travel to Bangalore and back than what they gave as a grant for the whole year. There was a lot to be learnt from these experiences. Among these are following main points.

Influencing governmental decisions poses greater risks than raising citizen awareness. Initially CIVIC found it very difficult to talk to the government. In the course of time it caused a division in the government between the CIVIC-friendly and the CIVIC-unfriendly. In the next stage the CIVIC-friendly were not necessarily friendly but they started using CIVIC’s name to document that they were citizen friendly and therefore had increased legitimacy.To work as a forum on policy and planning issues any organisation needs enormous resources, not just the financial stuff but more so of a professional and intellectual nature. CIVIC was hard put to raise such an upwelling of resources within a short time.Low profile options seem to work well so long as a group engaged itself only in face to face contacts and work in small groups and raise group concerns. Low profile attitudes and very large-scale public interest seem to be a contradiction unless the group is involved only in providing some specialist staff function. In a co-ordinating and socially motivating role of an urban forum a low profile attitude is a retarding one. This was proved amply in the exchange (fiasco!) with ESCAP. CIVIC has refused to face its organisational weakness due its zeal in guarding the spontaneity and freshness of approach to each emerging problem. It has continued to remain a weak organisation and made a virtue of it even in waxing days. It needs to wake up to this shortcoming and gear itself up into a better organisation to address and manage its own as well as the co-opted resources. In its annual review meetings the criteria of efficiency and effectiveness were rarely addressed. Mention of the minimal resources invested by the professional or personal efforts was aimed at receiving kudos, and armchair satisfaction about the efficiency. There has been no follow up on assessing the efficiency and increasing the same.

The idiom of Urban Forum

CIVIC had learnt a good volume of lessons from the experience in the earlier phases. But members continued to be ambivalent in their attitude toward better organisation and finding ways of implementing the same. Some members assumed that they had formed an organisation. Others felt the need for betterment but wanted to avoid the problems of bureaucratising CIVIC. The main concern shared by everyone was the sustenance of spontaneity. There was an increasing realisation that some committed core of an establishment was necessary. This should serve at least project formulation and documentation, team development and co-ordination of the same, in addition to simple

14

mail and phone handling work. These concerns were reinforced by the needs of the new efforts.

By the end of1994, the IL & FS submitted its report on a rapid transit system for Bangalore as commissioned by the state government. Until this time the CIVIC trustees and associates formed a core group that looked into all the activities discussed the course of action and took active part in the follow up process. Out of the experience of the Nagara Palika Act and that from the earlier metro railway issues CIVIC learned that it needed a more involved and specialised application of the mind. Thus CIVIC formed a number of sub-groups to deal with the different kinds of problem areas. A transportation sub-group focused its efforts on the mass transit plans and proposals made by IL & FS. Another sub-group dealt with the Swabhimana process of the Bangalore Development Authority and the neighbourhood planning issues. A third sub-group dealt with the CDP (Comprehensive Development Plan) process under the Town & Country Planning Act of Karnataka. A fourth took up environmental issues in the urban environment. A fifth dealt with “state of the city” project. Another focused on the Newsletter.

This became a period of great activity. CIVIC as a whole found itself spread a little too thin after about a year and a half of such diversified activities. There was still no resource raising effort pursued in any serious way. The demands of all the sub-groups descended on the on the one or two co-ordinators on CIVIC payroll. Eventually, CIVIC could not even pay their salaries regularly. Both co-ordinators ended up leaving CIVIC altogether, though they were founder members.

A couple of years later CIVIC had revived with some fund raising through projects and other means. The current situation is again nascent as some effort is being made to develop a permanent establishment with resources specially dedicated for the purpose. At the same time some new initiatives may be in the offing through aided projects that may also raise the resource level. This phase might emphasise the development of a core bureaucracy in CIVIC.

In summary, CIVIC’s formation may be perceived as an evolution in the three phases till now. The first, foundation phase witnessed only the articulation of a broad-based frustration and a need for a common process and activities thereof. The second phase was one of comprehension when CIVIC was drawn into the impending issues of the MRTS (Mass Rapid Transit System), the 74th Amendment, the save Bal Bhavan effort and case, and the National Games housing complex issues. In the comprehension phase CIVIC also expanded its co-opted human resources and expertise out of the necessity to learn and grapple with specialised policy issues. The third phase followed with the realisation that an organisation has to be developed and managed in order sustain the forum that CIVIC wants to provide and become socially relevant. It remains to be seen as to how CIVIC would strike a balance between its assertive spontaneity and common process forum, on the one hand, and the advent of organisation development modes on the other.

Assessing the Initiative on 74th Amendment

Increased iniative

The initiative increased CIVIC’s confidence immensely. In many ways, CIVIC took a lead over everyone in this effort. Firstly, most people including the members of the state

15

bureaucracy were unaware of the import of this Amendment. Secondly, they were not aware of the existing state legislation that would be reinforced by the 74th Amendment. Thirdly, the movement behind the Amendment (as given in the statement of objectives presented by the Union Minister Ms.Sheila Kaul) indicted the behaviour of the state agencies. It held that the bureaux had “usurped” the powers and responsibilities of the local government, severely. And, it called for sweeping changes that threatened the power and perquisites of the existing system.

Dissemination

CIVIC members and associates researched many of these items and articulated them through their workshops. The National Conference papers and discussions highlighted and documented more of these and drew wide public attention. The papers in various summary forms were also copied and distributed widely through the mail and through personal interaction among friends. In addition, the issues were also reported upon in the Newsletter. CIVIC drew many participants to these workshops, seminars and conferences from various academic and social service institutions, within the region, the state of Karnataka, and sometimes around the country. These participants in turn relayed much of the issues and values raised by CIVIC in these meets. Meagre resources limited CIVIC to such benign methods of propogation.

The doctrinal traditions

It may be remembered that Karnataka from the old Mysore tradition believed in the Mayo Doctrine related to local government. Mayo, as Viceroy had advocated an efficient and strong bureaucracy to rule the local government. He had held that the local government was necessary only to the extent of unburdening the Imperial Government’s treasury and revenues by raising local resources to provide for local services. This was in direct opposition to the Ripon Doctrine that held the promotion of participatory local governance as of paramount importance. Ripon, as Viceroy had indicted the provincial governments repeatedly for perpetuating a strangle hold on the local government. He had held that the promotion of popular representation was necessary even at the cost of some inefficiency in local administration. Ms. Sheila Kaul was only repeating what the Ripon Doctrine had propagated about a hundred years earlier, though she may not like to admit as much.

In this phase, CIVIC learnt that the debate throughout the nation in regard to the 73rd and 74th Amendments was a repetition of the age-old debate between the Ripon Doctrine and the Mayo Doctrine. CIVIC’s researches sifted through the legislative programmes of several states in this regard. They provided comparative statements in summary form on the progressive efforts made in some other states.

These efforts made the state executives withdraw into a shell. They became more secretive about their deliberations on the follow-up legislation with the help of Times Research Foundation.The secrecy increased the public suspicion and misgivings about the government’s intentions. CIVIC thus found itself in a situation as if it had discovered something like “the Emperor’s clothes.”

How should a forum like CIVIC respond to such an embarrassing situation? Frankly, none of the members or associates had any clear idea, though they were in touch with

16

many in and outside the government who were sympathetic to their cause. Eventually, the election of a new government in the state helped the situation. The new government was more open to issues of public concern. Karnataka has not given up the Mayo Doctrine (it is not likely to; there is too much at stake by way of patronage and perquisites) but has become somewhat circumspect about sweeping the rest under the carpet. One might say that CIVIC helped in the process of increasing awareness and ushering in some transparency through this initiative.

Other initiatives

Metro Rail, building confidence

This was CIVIC’s kick-off initiative. The group had not pursued anything like this before. And it simply plunged into the works to discover the environment and its own shortcomings to deal with such a problem. But CIVIC members substituted this lack of ability with some theoretical rhetoric pertaining to democratic values, public participation, social evaluation and ratification of public policy, planning and the like. This was a political statement to raise awareness among the different role players, a sort of wake–up call. To the state bureaucracy it said that we are no longer benign citizens and that we want to be involved and “you better educate us on your plans and policies” so that “we citizens can be a part of the decision-making process”. To the lay citizens it beckoned saying “stand up and be counted and register your preferences”. Of particular concern to the Metro rail proposal were many issues like (1) the technology of the system, (2) its interface with the urban plans, (3) the possible impact on the urban environment, (4) the client division between the commuters and non commuters, (5) that between the urban community and the rest of the state in terms of public resources to be invested, etc. CIVIC had no clue in regard to any of these issues. However, it plunged into this initiative quickly to learn that such issues and more existed and that they required knowledge and expertise. It conveyed as much to the citizens, sincerely. CIVIC spoke to the state government more as a protagonist than as a rabble-rouser. It urged the state to invite the citizens to share their concern with the bureaucracy and the administration.

The Newsletter, widening interest

The CIVIC Newsletter was published, first, in 1994. It was a comprehensive effort at the dissemination of information. The publication continued for a period of two years at more or less regular intervals. It sought to make an active effort towards raising issues of public concern. Volunteers sponsored each issue in the efforts of writing, editing as well as printing and publication.

The Newsletter helped communicate the perspective of CIVIC across the state of Karnataka. CIVIC mailed out up to 3000 copies of each issue to readers from different backgrounds. In addition, some specific issues were highlighted and debated in the Newsletter. One might recall a write up entitled “For 11 days of Glory?” published in the inaugural issue. It established the framework for CIVIC’s active opposition to the conversion of sensitive open space for the construction of the housing complex to accommodate the athletes of the National Games. It also helped launch the public interest litigation in this regard.

17

Another issue reviewed the “Structure Plan for Bangalore” inviting the Bangalore Development Authority’s Chairman to present the official point of view and debating the same. The Newsletter was not able to sustain a regular periodicity because of the ad hoc nature of sponsorship. The effort slackened during 1996 as many team members could spare less time. The last issue was released in October 1997.

This initiative offered many lessons. Importantly, the following may be listed. Volunteer motivations go through a cycle of engagement, involvement and disengagement and they need to be renewed.Ad hoc systems based fully on voluntarism would last for about a couple of years when the interest and resources start waning.Awareness raising and information dissemination will have their limitations, and they need to be followed up with greater involvement of the client population in operational efforts. Democratic awareness does not necessarily lead to participatory action by the citizens.

National Games Housing Case, CIVIC helplessness

The National Games Housing Project on the Koramangala Tank was proposed and approved by the Government of Karnataka (GOK) with the money sanctioned by the Government of India (GOI). Things were done rather secretively and in a hurry in late 1994. The money was sanctioned via HUDCO. Some CIVIC members had witnessed unfinished and half-complete drawings of the project Master Plan that had been “approved” and technically certified by the Chief Architect of HUDCO. That was the first inkling that CIVIC got about the project. Soon CIVIC also came to know from the GOK Department of Forests that this was to be located on sensitive lands designated for Parks and Open Space in the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) of Bangalore. The proposal had identified an area of about 47 acres plus in Koramangala in one of the 36 planning districts of the Bangalore CDP.

The early revenue maps of Bangalore had identified this land as a part of Srinivagulu Tank. Over the decades the tank had been drained out and remained dry for most of the year. Bangalore is rain-deficit for six months in a year between November and June. But the bed of the Tank remained like marshland and formed a part of the drainage basin that fed rainwater run-off into the Bellandur Tank. Bellandur Tank remains a full water-body despite the encroachments and the discharge of sewage water into it.

The GOK Department of Forests had identified this area as “wetland, and a very important place for a lot of bird species.” It had been identified also, as a home for some waterfowl and migratory birds. More importantly, the CDP for the Planning District had designated this land for Parks and Open Space. The Zoning Plan had deemed it as such and enforceable. In addition, the Bangalore Development Authority’s policy norms for the open space and parks were higher than what was actually provided. Thus there was a deficit of this class of land use in the Planning District.

Under these circumstances CIVIC members and many citizens including some government officials felt that there was no justification in taking this land away and converting it to housing use. CIVIC contacted many Departments in the GOK and made several appeals to various officials. CIVIC pointed out that the GOK would be violating the rules and norms of the CDP as formed by the BDA and approved by the state

18

legislature. The GOK would also be violating the provisions in regard to the process of planning as mandated in the Town and Country Planning Act of Karnataka. CIVIC drew a blank everywhere but found sympathy to its case from some officials in the GOK Departments of Forests, Town & Country Planning, the BDA/BMRDA and the like.

Simultaneous with the above efforts CIVIC launched a publicity campaign through the Newspapers, its own Newsletter and some pamphleteering. CIVIC learnt during this time that an order has been passed secretively that changed the designation of the 47 acres of land from the category of Open Space and Park to Residential use. The propriety and the legality of this order itself is questionable. As per the Law the Zoning has to be made in accordance with the CDP. The CDP itself derives it legitimacy as it goes through a public (participatory) process of formulation. It does not stand to reason that the government of the state can direct the BDA or BMRDA to change the Zoning merely because the Authority happens to be a creation of the state. There was a confusion here (most likely a deliberate one) created by the GOK between what can be an administrative over-ruling as against a legitimate result of a public process in accordance with the Law.

CIVIC filed a Writ petition in the Karnataka High Court along with five other voluntary organizations. The plea was made essentially to quash the GOK order over-ruling the CDP’ designation of the lands as Open Space and Park use and changing the same to Residential use. The Court delayed the hearing judgement for more than a year and came out with a wishy-washy judgement in favour of the GOK. The judgement never addressed the question of legitimacy of planning and zoning in accordance with the Law and a public process. Instead, the Court merely stated the administrative hierarchy that the BDA/BMRDA were authorities created by the GOK and therefore the GOK had the right to issue a directive to the authorities to do its bidding.

This was one of the most frustrating experiences for CIVIC. CIVIC members found during this case that neither lawyers nor judges were familiar with the planning traditions and the public process requirements of the Town & Country Planning Act. The lawyers were educated on these items by some of CIVIC’s members and associates. One of them even wrote the complete brief for the lawyer who argued the case on behalf of CIVIC. The problem continues not only in this state but also in many other states of India.

The Stakeholders’ Forum, building up from below

This initiative of CIVIC was aimed at bringing people together and inducing them to focus on the urban issues objectively, and collectively. The forum idea also embraced the 18 functions of the local government highlighted in the 12th Schedule of the 74th Amendment. This would be a pre-requisite to some edifice that can be built upon it collectively like that of a citizens’ charter.

The first phase of this initiative sought to develop a collective vision of the citizens about the city. It would help develop a framework of the problems and potentials of the urban community. CIVIC sought to comprehend and project this framework as a milieu for citizen’s action in various roles.

CIVIC organised a workshop in April 1998 at the National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore. The participants were drawn from a broad cross-section of the urban community. It included bureaucrats, professionals, NGOs, other voluntary groups, industrial organisations such as the CII and lay citizens.

19

They formed working groups in the usual manner of such workshops in regard to (1) urban governance, (2) urban environment, (3) social services and infrastructure, and (4) transportation and traffic. A document detailing the city’s profile was prepared by CIVIC and circulated. Later direct mail survey was conducted covering some 1200 people in order to identify the salient issues. As a result of these CIVIC was able to identify five important dimensions of action. These were developed as a framework to assist the Bangalore City Corporation in its monitoring and evaluation efforts. They included (a) the city profile, (b) the consultation workshop, (c) the action plan key points, (d) a framework of community participation, and (5) a quarterly report of assessment.

Among the important action points was the CCS, the Citizens’ Complaints System. This would be anchored at the City Corporation. In addition, some action points are being proposed at the Ward Committees. The Nagara Palika Act envisioned that the Ward Committees will be assigned the monitoring and evaluation function by Law. That was one of CIVIC’s recommendations to the state in its testimony during the formation and revision stages of the state legislation.

The effort continues. Meanwhile, there have been changes in the government, both local and state. There have been changes also in the personnel. The state has perpetuated a weak Mayor system. There is also an attempt, though veiled, to weaken the council and the committees. Though these are difficult do directly, they can be manoeuvred vicariously, by channelling the resources through the control of the state-seconded bureaucrats.

This initiative is full of good intentions and is a comprehensive effort. It has drawn from a lot of the earlier work done by CIVIC in regard to the 74th Amendment and the Nagara Palika Act. Operationally, the work has just begun and has to sustained and developed over long period of time.

20

Summary assessment

We reported on the 74th Amendment issues as the major initiative of CIVIC over the years. We also reported in capsule other initiatives that embellished this one. These represent the most significant examples of CIVIC’s interaction with the environment. They were also typical learning experiences for the members and associates. We figure that all other experiences of CIVIC would fall under one of the reported evolutionary phases. So we are not reporting on all of them.

One may notice that we reported both items of success and items of failure and frustration. To a large extent the success or failure did not affect CIVIC’s enthusiasm or commitment. At the same time we must concede that there were no tangible measures of success or failure other than in terms of the ends sought and the means developed. We are still at a stage where a measurement of achievement is not possible. It is also impossible to identify any achievement as due to the efforts of CIVIC. In this nebulous milieu, we tend to be qualitative in our assessment and catious in our lessons.

We provide a matrix below that might help assess CIVIC’s efforts at a glance. It reveals a pattern of evolution, mostly perceptual and conjectural. It is tangible as to the number of dimensions in which CIVIC expanded its activities, and those in which the members applied their minds. It also summarises the improvement in the quality of the decisions made and issues raised in public. However, tracking the ‘organisational learning’ in regard to the intervention, the milieu and the actors in response to CIVIC has been a little elusive.

Table 1: Initiatives, role responses and lessons of experience

Case InitiativeRole assumed by CIVICOperational modeRole as perceived by othersLessons learnt by CIVIC

1 Metro RailCIVIC was beginning its operations at this stage; it assumed the role of a learner and eventual facilitator of a public discussion to bring people and government together.Public meeting with sponsors such as the Rotary Club, Max Mueller Bhavan, other NGOs and citizens at largePeople perceived CIVIC only as a facilitator and co-ordinator. They did not expect much expertise at this stage. They looked for a town meeting, essentially.[a]The need to research and develop a good knowledge base.[b] The need to articulate issues in detail.[c] The need to induce co-operation in establishing the citizens’ cause.[d] Public meetings by themselves do not solve or resolve any problems; there is a need to organise and guide the process towards an end.

2 74thAmendmentCIVIC became very serious with this issue as witnessed in the initial rounds, the workshop, the public hearing, the national conference and the testimony presented to the

21

state. CIVIC’s knowledge base, expertise and demand rationality were quite high with an enhanced self-image.CIVIC emphasised the organised and literary mode of communication in this phase. It debated less this time and explained its position as a set of rational demands in keeping with the constitutionalism. The papers presented in the National Conference and the recommendations formulated at the workshop provided the main focus for CIVIC’s position.People welcomed CIVIC’s new self-image and position. It was a pleasant surprise to many even outside Bangalore. However, many expected instant answers to be provided by CIVIC.[a] Sustained efforts backed by resources can/will produce some results.[b] The results may not be exactly as expected or designed.[c] An organisation needs to regroup and renew its efforts by co-opting expertise and resources consistently.[d] Reduction of the original ends may help in achieving some consensus and allow progress towards the goal as happened in the recommendation regarding the Ward Committees by CIVIC.[e] There was a need for organisational learning that was still absent in CIVIC.

3 NewsletterCIVIC assumed the role of an agent of disseminating information.The Newsletter did not assume a propagandist’s role. On controversial issues it invited several sides to present their viewpoints including those of the government.The Newsletter was mailed to some 2000 addressees in and outside Bangalore. It was a shortcoming that the Newsletter was not published regularly. There were only ten Newsletters over a period of two years.Perception of the Newsletter revolved around “keeping in touch” kind of relationship. On some issues like that of the National Games Housing case there was some timely information.[a] The Newsletter effort required a dedicated team to write edit and publish.[b] It also required a good amount of committed resources by way of finance and equipment and the like.[c] In addition, a periodic Newsletter will need a regular establishment to deal with the feed back items and appropriate responses to the same.

4 National Games HousingCIVIC assumed the role of raising the public interest. It played the roles of raising awareness, persuading the government, investigating the mechanisms/machinations and finally that of the litigant. CIVIC co-ordinated with several volunteer organisations to raise the environmental and social concerns. It filed the PIL and CIVIC members even provided the briefs for the lawyers.The citizen organisations and a number government officials perceived CIVIC as a genuine facilitator. But the Court in it judgement seemed to have dismissed it as a case from a “rabble-rouser.”[a] The government is not one integral entity.[b] In many cases the government acts against its own professed interests.[c] Courts do not always listen to what the plaintiff has to say. They make up their mind on their own.

5 Stakeholders’ Forum

22

This initiative brought out CIVIC’s futuristic self-image. It helped raise the awareness of a variety of citizens by way of redefining the perspectives of issues for the morrow. In a workshop kind of format CIVIC encouraged everyone as a citizen to look into the current and future problems on a continuing basis. The questions addressed essentially the problem of how citizens may develop a demand rationale based on the concerns of local governance issues as objective items of action.This initiative is in the present continuous. Only some small formulations have been made. Some action points have been identified. But they are in the process of implementation. Citizens will expect more out of CIVIC as a co-ordinator or a referral bureau in these activities.[a] CIVIC realises the need for a core establishment that can handle on going items and issues as they arise.[b] The need for a learning organisational mode and arrangement are felt increasingly.[c] For the first time CIVIC is seeking resources actively in order to develop itself into a civil community bureau.

6 ELRTSCIVIC assumed a higher organisational role in this effort. Already the members and associates of CIVIC had been formed into specialised sub-groups. This time sub-group co-opted and co-ordinated many specialists and researchers into the effort. CIVIC’s confidence in the forum building was also on the rise. Besides, it was well armed with the information. Operationally, CIVIC emphasised positivism and ignored the obstacles. It did not fight shy of the political route approach the cabinet ministers directly, without appearing to ignore the executives.The widest variety of citizens came to the hearing, including MNC representatives. They perceived CIVIC as a forum of raising rational demands and issues. [a] CIVIC realised the value of research in analysing issues and presenting the same in the public forum.[b] The political leadership needed more than that; they wanted strong lobbies and pressure groups behind the causes and rationale.[c] All of these efforts till now found a response only among the middle classes.

Outcome & impact

In the early days, CIVIC did not seek to achieve any objectives in a materialistic manner. As we mentioned earlier its ends were vague, except for the larger concern of securing the democratic process in local governance. Thus CIVIC assumed the role of a learner and a facilitator of public discussions. Operationally, the first efforts were made in co-operation with the Rotary Club, Max Mueller Bhavan, other NGOs and citizens.

The need to develop a knowledge base, the ability to articulate issues in a meaningful manner, the need to identify the citizens’ cause and the need to organise and guide the process of discussion were the items of learning. CIVIC realised that public meetings by themselves do not achieve anything tangible, unless the concerns are guided into tangible and meaningful objects.

CIVIC became more serious about co-opting specialists in the various subjects of concern and developing an interventionist professional role. There were problems associated with this realm. For starters everything had to be geared up to the literary

23

mode. That restricted the layers of participation straight away. Then to move across the stratified barriers it required a lot of resources and innovative techniques of dissemination. These are not easily available to most voluntary organisations.

The approach taken in all these efforts was inclusive and avoided adversary relationships, except when CIVIC took to the Courts of Law on a couple cases of public interest litigation.

Partnership & the policy environment.

We covered this in detail in an earlier section. Suffice it to say here that CIVIC’s advantage was its middle class social contacts. Other than that the members did not join forces with any political organisation or party cadres or interests. CIVIC members and associates were fairly acquainted with the bureaucrats of the state and local government. Meetings could be arranged easily and representations made smoothly. However, no particular outcome could be targeted.

Bureaucratic processes in India are still at a stage where modular decision making is not implemented. The bureau is not an industrialised form of institution. Executives still perform only balancing acts; they lack a unitised approach to integrate policy and performance. Thus it is impossible to discuss a policy item with a bureaucrat and arrive (or, even guess) at a possible outcome. When an interventionist seeks to focus on the process these items become critical. The model requires the unitisation of the process. In the absence of that only vague agreements are possible even in the best of circumstances.

These problems are more acute in a culturally heterogeneous and amorphous society like ours. Therefore, CIVIC found it difficult to identify clearly any concern of a stratified layer that could be articulated in the public forum. Similar problems were faced in its media relationships as well as other voluntary organisations. CIVIC’s efforts were thus confined to letter communication through the mailing list, telephone calls to other voluntary organisations and citizen groups, and occasional write-ups in the newspapers. CIVIC members and associates did have easy access to the middle level political leaders; however, it did not evolve into an influence at any time.

Strategies & initiatives

The efforts discussed above were consciously organised and pursued. At no time did the participants think in terms of a strategy to achieve a targeted outcome. It was always a “make-do” with whatever resources were available. One might say that the strategy evolved as the events unfolded rather empirically. Any conception resembling a strategy can be developed only by hindsight and summarising.

One may add that the initiatives were based on strengths. And, since CIVIC was a horizontal organisation whoever felt able and willing pursued the initiative. Others pitched in with their own contributions. The weaknesses of CIVIC were not discussed at any length, nor was it given any importance in the formulation of efforts. If the weaknesses had been assessed, perhaps, the initiatives may not have been pursued this far.

Resources & leadership

24

CIVIC’s only resources were its members and their voluntarism. The efforts were pursued project by project. Even the Newsletter effort was supported one issue at a time by a sponsor. There were no longer-term resources or equipment available to CIVIC. Post 1999 some effort has been made to raise some resources and develop a working establishment. Resourcefulness was greater than the resources available to CIVIC at any time.

We mentioned earlier that CIVIC was a horizontal organisation. Almost everyone associated with CIVIC was capable of providing a lead in some subject of concern. Thus CIVIC down played any idea of leadership as understood conventionally. One may add that CIVIC was even anti-leadership oriented as it emphasised the process more than the personalities or the organisation or even the outcome. In each of the initiatives a different person or a different group of people took the lead, spontaneously.

Facilitating Factors

We mentioned earlier that CIVIC’s members came from the class of professionals, academics and people of societal standing in Bangalore. That was the most facilitating factor even to begin with. Subsequently, people like Heiko Seivers of Max Muller Bhavan provided a lot of facilities and continued support as mentioned earlier. Others were eventual such as the timely intervention by the Minister in State Cabinet. He persuaded the bureaucrats to appear in the public hearing organised by CIVIC. Other events followed; there was a change in government after the elections. That brought in an administration more sympathetic to the cause of the 74th Amendment.

A one-man commission was appointed by the new government to receive testimony from the public on the provisions of the Nagara Palika Act. The comments and testimony of learned experts, their recommendations and continued pressure helped achieve some awareness and action in regard to the formation of Ward Committees.

The obstacles

Among the many constraints one perceived in this process we may highlight the following two categories. One was doctrinaire the other was empirical. The doctrinaire part was articulated well earlier in the Mayo doctrine. Bureaucrats of the state still prefer efficiency of the administrative machinery to be the main item of local governance. They do not perceive the evolutionary needs as important. At best they would leave it to the market mechanism and social development.

Empirically, the bureaucracy continues to stick to system sustaining modes. System transformation modes are rarely pursued, as decision-making powers are constituted traditionally, in spite of the Administrative Reforms programmes and new legislation on decentralisation.

Thirdly, the resource constraints of CIVIC worked towards inhibiting professional development in the organisation. Volunteers did work at rather sophisticated levels. But they cannot be expected to sustain an activity beyond one or two projects. That would cover a period of two or three years. Highly qualified professionals are needed elsewhere in addition to pursuing their own professional ends. CIVIC depended only on such people. While it provided high quality out put it could not be sustained for long periods of time.

25

26

List of Reference Documents

1._________ ESCAP, Report on the Proceedings of the Workshop on Urban Forums, United Nations, New.York, NY 1996 p.2..

2.________, CIVIC, Public Transport Sub-Group, Notes on ELRTS Hearing From CIVIC’s archive files.

3.________, CIVIC Newsletters, 10 Issues, 1994-96, from CIVIC archive files, and Leo Saldanha’s ESG Office.

4.________,“Establishing the Stakeholders Forum”, Notes from CIVIC archive files.

5.________,“The City Profile” Draft for the Stakeholders Forum, CIVIC Manuscript 1997 pp.104

6.________,CIVIC & 5 others Vs. State of Karnataka & others, judgement on Writ Petition No.758 of 1995, and other related documents in the archive files of CIVIC and Leo Saldanha’s office at ESG.

7.________,74th Amendment & the Nagara Palika Act, Conference Papers & Proceedings.1994, Unpublished Collection, CIVIC archive files and Subbarayan Prasanna’s Office.

8.________,The Nagara Palika Act: One day workshop, held at ISI; documents on recommendations to the state government. CIVIC archives and Subbarayn Prasanna’s Office.

DRAFTWednesday, December 15, 1999

27