Why MP-led dev work not illegal

HC asks govt to explain within 4 weeks; it is job of local govt, says a 2006 judgment of the court

16 August 2010, 18:00 PM

Shakhawat Liton and Ashutosh Sarkar

The High Court yesterday asked the government to explain why granting Tk 15 crore for each constituency for rural infrastructure development prescribed by lawmakers should not be declared unconstitutional. The Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (Ecnec) on March 9 approved the five-year-long project of Tk 4,691 crore to carry out development work in 300 constituencies. Following the guidelines of the LGRD ministry, legislators have already sent their proposals to the ministry for development work they want done in their constituencies. Local Government Engineering Department of the LGRD ministry was supposed to start implanting the proposals from this fiscal year. Representatives of local government bodies, particularly those elected to upazila parishads, expressed grievances over the government decision, as it ignores the local government bodies' constitutional authority to conduct those development work. Anwarul Haque Bablu, chairman of Akkelpur upazila of Joypurhat, yesterday filed a writ petition with the HC challenging the legality of the government decision. In response, an HC bench of Justice Mohammad Anwarul Haque and Justice Syed Abu Kowser Md Dabirush-shan issued the rule upon the government asking it to respond within four weeks. The bench also stayed the Ecnec's decision to allocate Tk 15 crore to Akkelpur constituency in Joypurhat for four weeks. Bablu in his petition said as per the constitution, the elected representatives of local government are assigned to carry out the rural infrastructure development projects. But the Ecnec allocated money for the projects that will be implemented under the supervision of the lawmakers in violation of the constitution, said M Yousuf Ali, who appeared for the petitioner. Cabinet secretary, principal secretary to the Prime Minister's Office, secretaries to the ministries of finance, planning, and LGRD have been made respondents to the HC rule. Legislators' involvement in carrying out local development activities has been mired with controversy and has triggered debate on whether MPs can be empowered to interfere in the activities of the local government bodies. The Supreme Court in a verdict delivered on April 27, 2006, categorically stated that legislators are entitled to ask for any information and object to any of their electorates before the House, but they cannot interfere with the local administration. It had said the scheme of the constitution is that members of parliament and the ministers would perform their functions centrally, keeping a broad view of the necessity of the country as a whole, while functioning of the local government bodies envisaged under Articles-59 and -60, shall be confined to the needs of local areas. "…The members of parliament have got no direct role or function, in respect of either development or maintenance of law and order, in the district or in other local administrative units," said the court in the verdict on a writ petition titled "Anwar Hossain Manju versus the Government of Bangladesh". The court in that verdict declared illegal the notification on the appointment of district ministers. The government did not file any appeal against the verdict with the appellate division, which means the verdict is now law of the land. The current government also refrained from introducing the system of district ministers. But the government allowed MPs to interfere with the functions of upazila parishads, a crucial tier of the local government body that was reintroduced after around 19 years. The government in the new upazila parishad act, passed in parliament last year, made MPs advisers to the parishads in their constituencies and the parishads have to "accept the suggestions of the lawmakers". Over one and a half years have passed since the upazila election and the upazila parishads cannot begin functioning fully as the upazila nirbahi officers, who are secretaries to the parishads, have been discharging almost all functions of the body in consultation with the lawmaker of the constituency. Since the enactment of the law, representatives elected to the upazila parishads have been strongly denouncing the provision allowing lawmakers' interference in the bodies' activities and demanded its scrapping to allow the parishads function independently. They threatened the government with street agitation.