Nepal introduced a three-tier governance system in the new constitution promulgated in 2015. One of the main objectives of this shared governance or federal governance system was to devolve powers to lower level governments and make the governance effective, especially when there are difficult times such as disasters. But as seen in the floods and landslides recently, the effectiveness of lower level governments, mainly the provincial governments, remained disappointing. While a number of local governments seem to have taken measures to address the plights of people in their jurisdiction, the provincial governments, which have to justify themselves by showing action, have once again failed to make their presence felt during the crisis. This is troubling considering that the provincial governments are unable to fulfill the purpose for which they were established when this structure was envisioned. The failure is likely to further strengthen the question a section of critics are asking about the relevance of provincial governments in Nepal.
Provincial governments blame center for their poor performance
There was a huge loss of lives and properties due to floods, landslides, soil erosion and inundation triggered by heavy rainfall last week in all provinces east of Gandaki. Since the water-induced disasters also wreaked havoc in Kathmandu Valley, most of the attention of the federal government was basically focused on the federal capital. But ironically, provincial governments in Koshi, Madhesh and Bagmati remained as mute spectators even in the face of such an unprecedented crisis. One minister from Madhesh Province even justified their inaction saying that they were not able to provide relief materials to the flood victims in their province due to lack of disaster management law. Of course, it is understandable that all the government bodies must follow the law while carrying out their activities. However, it is hard to imagine a minister in any other country, except Nepal, justifying inability to distribute emergency aid due to lack of law. At this time of national crisis, the provincial governments should be as active as the federal government in facilitating the rescue and distribution of assistance to the victims. They should take the lead in creating plans for rehabilitation of those affected by the disasters. The relevance of provincial governments can be justified in the eyes of their critics only if they could make their presence felt during such calamities.
There are a number of things that the provincial government can do to ensure effective disaster response to affected people. The provincial government could have cooperated, coordinated and facilitated with the local governments as well as mobilized social organizations by looking at the nature of needs people may have in their respective provinces. Unfortunately, none of the provincial governments seems to have made such an attempt. Provincial governments could have been most active and effective in all phases of rescue, emergency relief and rehabilitation if their leadership had taken some proactive initiatives. They could have even issued an ordinance if the lack of law was the only reason hindering their disaster response efforts. The provincial governments must understand that their inaction during recent disasters has given their opponents a strong reason to question their relevance. The ineptitude of the provincial political leadership has not only raised concerns about the provincial governments but also the federal system as a whole. Therefore, it would be appropriate to hold those in provincial leadership accountable to the people or seek a change in the current political leadership for their failure to fulfill their responsibilities.
