Advertisement

Emerging Politics of Accountability: Sub-national Reflections from Bihar

  • Himanshu JhaEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Since 2004 state has reaffirmed its commitment towards ‘rights-based development’ that granted legal rights to the citizens by enacting laws, such as Right to Information (transparency and accountability), National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (right to food and work), Right to Education and Forest Rights Act (for the tribal citizens living in the forest areas). It can be argued that there is fundamental change in the welfare regime in India in terms of redefining the citizenship-state linkages on at least four counts. First, the Supreme Court rulings and interpretation of constitution in new ways have resulted in crossovers between directive principles and fundamental rights, the former non-justiciable had now become justiciable. Secondly, the legality of the rights has changed the concept of welfare from an ‘end user’ or ‘beneficiary perspective’ to citizens with legal rights. Thirdly, welfare is now legally enforceable and demandable with a well worked out legal system (targeted goals versus due focus on elaborately worked out means and processes), focusing on equity, non-discrimination, transparency, accountability and participation (core of rights-based development). Hence, the citizens can now demand rights and accountability from the state. Fourthly, the programmatic framework of ‘welfare’ can be withdrawn but the legally supported welfare regime cannot be withdrawn. On these accounts, the changed welfare regime is expected to have a direct impact on the inclusion of the excluded. Relevant questions need to be raised, such as: who uses these rights, how do they use it and what form do these legislations take when they hit the ground-level implementation? In this context, this chapter studies the implementation of Right to Information Act (RTIA) in Bihar, a state in eastern India, to examine the progression and deepening of institutional change.

References

  1. Bhattacharya, S., & Jha, R. (2009). Economic growth, law and corruption: evidence from India. ASARC Working Paper, The Australian National University, September 2009. Retrieved at https://crawford.anu.edu.au/acde/asarc/pdf/papers/2009/WP2009_15.pdf.
  2. Boettke, P. J., Coyne, C. J., & Leeson, P. T. (2008). Institutional stickiness and the new development economics. American Journal of Economics and Sociology , 67(2), 331–358.Google Scholar
  3. Brass, P. R. (1974). Language, religion, and politics in North India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Corbridge, S., Harriss, J., & Jeffrey, C. (2013). India today: Economy, politics and society. Cambridge: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Dahl, R. A. (1963). Modern Political Analysis. NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Eckstein, H. (1975). Case study and theory in political science. In F. I. Greenstein (Ed.), The Handbook of Political Science (pp. 79–138). Reading: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  7. Frankel, F. R. (1989). Introduction. In. F. R. Frankel & M. S. A. Rao (Eds.), Dominance and state power in modern India: Decline of social order (Vol. I, pp. 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Jha, U. (2003). Land, labour and power: Agrarian Crisis and the State in Bihar (1937–52). New Delhi: Aakar Books.Google Scholar
  9. Jha, H. (2018a). Emerging politics of accountability: Institutional progression of the right to information act. Economic & Political Weekly, 53(10), 47–54.Google Scholar
  10. Jha H. (2018b). State processes, ideas, and institutional change: The case of the Right to information Act in India. Pacific Affairs, 91(2), 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Kumar, S. (2004). New phase in backward caste politics in bihar, 1990-2000. In G. Shah (Ed.), Caste and Democratic Politics in India (p. 266). London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mukherji, R. (2013). Ideas, interests, and the tipping point: Economic change in India. Review of International Political Economy, 20(2), 363–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mukherji, R. (2014). Globalization of Deregulation: Ideas, Interests, and Institutional Change in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Pai, S. (2007). Political process in Uttar Pradesh: Identity, economic reforms and governance (p. 165). Pearson Education India.Google Scholar
  17. Page, S. E. (2006). Path dependence. Quarterly Journal of Political Science,1(1), 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rao, M. S. A. (1989). Some conceptual issues in the study of caste, class, ethnicity and dominance, In. F. R. Frankel & M. S. A. Rao (Eds.), Dominance and state power in modern India: Decline of social order (Vol. I, pp. 39–41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Roberts, A. (2010). A Great and Revolutionary Law? The First Four Years of India’s Right to Information Act. Public Administration Review, 70(6), 925-933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political Science, Centre for Asian and Transcultural Studies, South Asia InstituteHeidelberg UniversityHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations