“The institution of Gram Sabha has very little connection with the Gandhian spirit of direct democracy.” Critically examine.

Conceptualizing Gandhian Direct Democracy

Gandhi’s concept of direct democracy wasn’t merely about elections; it emphasized consensus-building, voluntary participation, and a focus on local needs and resources. He advocated for decisions being made at the lowest possible level, empowering villages to manage their own affairs. This involved a high degree of social responsibility, ethical conduct, and a rejection of centralized, top-down governance. The ideal village republic (Gram Rajya) was envisioned as a self-governing unit, free from external interference.

The Gram Sabha: Legal Framework and Intended Role

The 73rd Amendment Act mandated the establishment of Gram Sabhas in villages. According to Article 243A, the Gram Sabha consists of all registered voters in the village. Its functions, as outlined in state laws, typically include:

• Identifying beneficiaries for various schemes.
• Approving the village development plan.
• Monitoring the implementation of projects.
• Social audit of works.

Theoretically, the Gram Sabha is meant to be a platform for participatory planning and decentralized decision-making, mirroring Gandhi’s vision. However, the reality often falls short.

Disconnects Between Ideal and Reality

Several factors contribute to the disconnect between the Gandhian spirit and the functioning of Gram Sabhas:

• Limited Powers: Gram Sabhas often lack real power. Many decisions are still made by PRIs, state governments, or bureaucratic officials. Their role is often reduced to ratification rather than genuine participation.
• Low Participation: Voter turnout in Gram Sabha meetings is frequently low, particularly among marginalized groups. This undermines the principle of inclusivity and representative decision-making. According to a 2018 study by the Ministry of Panchayati Raj, average attendance in Gram Sabha meetings across India is around 15-20%.
• Dominance of Local Elites: Gram Sabhas can be dominated by local power structures – landlords, caste elders, or political leaders – who manipulate the process to serve their own interests.
• Lack of Capacity: Many Gram Sabha members lack the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively participate in planning and monitoring development activities.
• Political Interference: State governments sometimes interfere in the functioning of Gram Sabhas, undermining their autonomy.
• Focus on Implementation, Not Ideation: Gram Sabhas are often tasked with implementing schemes rather than initiating and owning development plans from the ground up.

Areas of Convergence

Despite the challenges, some aspects of Gram Sabhas align with Gandhian principles:

• Decentralization: The very existence of Gram Sabhas represents a step towards decentralizing power and bringing governance closer to the people.
• Local Focus: Gram Sabhas prioritize local needs and issues, reflecting Gandhi’s emphasis on self-reliance.
• Social Audit: The increasing emphasis on social audits, facilitated by Gram Sabhas, promotes transparency and accountability, aligning with Gandhian ethics.

Comparative Analysis: Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign

Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign (PPC) of 1996-97 provides a contrasting example. PPC emphasized decentralized planning with significant Gram Sabha participation, leading to increased local ownership and effective utilization of funds. This demonstrates that with political will and proper implementation, Gram Sabhas can more closely embody the Gandhian spirit. However, even PPC faced challenges in sustaining momentum.