Local government in Malaysia occupies the third and lowest level after federal and state governments. Under the Malaysian federal constitution (paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Ninth Schedule), local government is the responsibility of the states, but the federal government also exercises considerable power and influence over local government, especially in peninsular Malaysia.1 The dynamic of the Malaysian federal system is such that it has shifted the balance of power to the centre. Local government accounts for only 1% of GDP. There are 144 local authorities divided into cities (major administrative and commercial centres), municipalities (other urban areas), and districts (chiefly rural areas). Executive powers rest with the Mayor (cities) or President, supported and/or overseen by a system of committees. Currently, local councils in Malaysia are not elected: councillors are appointed by the state government for 3-year terms (with the option of re-appointment) and in most cases come from the ruling coalition.
The current situation in Malaysia highlights the traditional top-down approach to local administration (Phang and Ahmad, 2001). However, global influences and growing community awareness are now challenging the practice of centralized administration, and local government leadership is being forced to reappraise its role and contribution in local affairs. The community seeks empowerment and to reinforce its right to be consulted inthe decision making process of its local council. Nonetheless, it seems unlikely that federal and state governments will accede to calls for greater devolution of powers, or to change the current system of appointment of councillors. This lack of political decentralization strains the relationship between citizens and their local councils: implementing administrative decentralization without adequate political reforms will result in formal harmony but informal discord. In the absence of a legitimate transfer of powers and increased accountability to the community, the local leadership may instead become primarily accountable to itself and to local elites (Phang, 2006). The system lacks the necessary link between decentralization and participation through democratic representation (Gaventa, 2004). Under such circumstances, questions arise as to the viability of local government within the federal system and its capacity to sustain challenges from an increasingly aware community. Its weakness in sources of finance, service delivery and community participation have given local government a negative reputation. Without elected councillors, further attempts at local government restructuring to make local government more transparent, accountable and efficient may well fail. It seems likely that decentralization will remain elusive with powers remaining consolidated at the centre.
The current situation in Malaysia highlights the traditional top-down approach to local administration (Phang and Ahmad, 2001). However, global influences and growing community awareness are now challenging the practice of centralized administration, and local government leadership is being forced to reappraise its role and contribution in local affairs. The community seeks empowerment and to reinforce its right to be consulted inthe decision making process of its local council. Nonetheless, it seems unlikely that federal and state governments will accede to calls for greater devolution of powers, or to change the current system of appointment of councillors. This lack of political decentralization strains the relationship between citizens and their local councils: implementing administrative decentralization without adequate political reforms will result in formal harmony but informal discord. In the absence of a legitimate transfer of powers and increased accountability to the community, the local leadership may instead become primarily accountable to itself and to local elites (Phang, 2006). The system lacks the necessary link between decentralization and participation through democratic representation (Gaventa, 2004). Under such circumstances, questions arise as to the viability of local government within the federal system and its capacity to sustain challenges from an increasingly aware community. Its weakness in sources of finance, service delivery and community participation have given local government a negative reputation. Without elected councillors, further attempts at local government restructuring to make local government more transparent, accountable and efficient may well fail. It seems likely that decentralization will remain elusive with powers remaining consolidated at the centre.
No comments:
Post a Comment