Ethics Theory, TLP-UPSC Mains Answer Writing
Q. 4. “Social audits empower citizens to hold institutions accountable and rebuild trust in public service delivery.” Examine their role in promoting transparency and participatory governance. What are the key challenges in implementation, and how can they be addressed? (250 words, 15 marks)
Introduction
Social audits are assessment tools that allow people to evaluate the government’s performance in delivering public services. First institutionalised under MGNREGA, they help identify gaps in implementation. They aim to improve transparency and build public trust.
Body
Role of Social Audits in Transparency and Participatory Governance
- Promote accountability: They expose irregularities in fund usage and service delivery, making officials answerable to people. Example: In Andhra Pradesh, MGNREGA social audits helped recover crores misused by local officials.
- Empower citizens: By giving people a formal platform, they democratise information and decision-making processes.
- Ensure transparency: They uncover misappropriation, delays, or corruption. Example: Rajasthan’s Jan Sunwai model revealed fake job cards and ghost beneficiaries in PDS and pension schemes.
- Foster participatory governance: Communities directly engage in evaluating programs. Example: In Telangana, SHGs and village volunteers are trained to conduct audits, ensuring local involvement.
- Build trust in institutions: By encouraging redressal and responsiveness, they re-establish credibility of public systems among marginalized groups.
Despite their promise, social audits face several bottlenecks in practice, undermining their impact.
Challenges in Implementation
- Inadequate institutional support: Many states lack independent social audit units or dilute their functioning by merging them with implementing agencies.
- Poor awareness: Beneficiaries often remain unaware of their rights or audit procedures, limiting meaningful participation.
- Lack of follow-up: Audit findings are often ignored, with weak grievance redressal and no punitive action against guilty officials.
- Political and administrative resistance: Local elites and bureaucrats sometimes resist or intimidate social audit teams.
- Underfunding: Insufficient resources and trained manpower hinder consistent and quality audits.
Way Forward
- Legal backing: Implement the 2nd ARC recommendation to give statutory status to social audits across schemes.
- Independent units: Ensure financial and administrative autonomy of State Social Audit Units, as in Andhra Pradesh.
- Awareness campaigns: Use local platforms like Gram Sabhas and schools to educate citizens on audit rights.
- Actionable outcomes: Link audit findings to real-time grievance redressal, as seen in Odisha.
- Capacity building: Train SHGs and local volunteers in audit processes, like the Telangana model.
Conclusion
Rooted in the spirit of grassroots democracy, social audits operationalise Article 13 of the UN Convention Against Corruption and the 2nd ARC’s vision of citizen-centric governance, enabling communities to ensure accountable and responsive administration.
