Many lessons have been gleaned from Covid-19 pandemic and its induced lockdown which diverted the course of human history. In Nagaland too, the lessons from the first and second wave reveal the challenging realities of our vacuous health infrastructure and system. Yet, at the same time, individuals, communities, civil societies, traditional and church institutions demonstrate how well intended efforts have constructively supplemented the government’s Covid response in difficult times.
Pradeep Chhibber, Venktesh Shukla and Rahul Verma in an article, which appeared in The Print, entitled, “Experts are leading Covid fight globally. But not in India, the bureaucrats won’t allow it.” encapsulates some inherent concerns. The authors write, “The Indian state’s response to the crisis has made it clear that the bureaucracy wields enormous power.” Furthermore, it adds, “the bureaucracy tries to work out every detail of policy while ensuring that it retains control over almost every aspect of its implementation.”
The authors lament, “The bureaucrats seek a technocratic solution to every problem, and when their solution doesn’t work, they fire another technocratic salvo, and keep on repeating it. In many cases, the solutions offered become part of the problem.” Ironically, the article points out that the logic is simple. It says, “these rules and regulations ensure that the ‘good-intentioned’ bureaucracy remains in charge to prevent bad things from happening.”
The Nagaland experience shows that the bureaucracy has greatly contributed to the state government’s response in addressing the public health challenges posed by Covid-19. While the leadership, services, and personal sacrifices rendered are highly valued, we need to ensure that the lessons learned can be incorporated and introduced in training future bureaucrats. In an informal SWOT analysis of emerging trends and problems faced in the first Covid induced lockdown in Nagaland, some observations were made reflecting symptomatic concerns in the system.
The informal SWOT analysis affirms some of these views expressed on bureaucracy being a monolithic institution that is presented as the trouble shooter. The analysis observed that the Nagaland State approach is too bureaucratic. This means that the response cannot adequately respond to the basic needs required when too many layers of the bureaucratic decision-making and red tape slow down the critical response that is needed. Furthermore, the bureaucratic response is compounded because clear political leadership is absent, with many breaks or disconnects in the chain of command. This implies that officers on the ground need to be capable and understand the scope of their responsibilities, followed by relevant and strategic actions, especially in emergency situations.
Beyond the matters of health care issues, the analysis observed that the response needs to be dynamic, creative, and innovative in the Naga context. The critical nature and quality of response depends on continually receiving information that is timely and accurate from credible and reliable sources. When this information is shared broadly with the general public, then they are better prepared to make personal decisions about their lives. Such transparency can reduce fear mongering and general panic generated from rumors and fake news. These are some practical recommendations for the State to enable confidence building measures.
Gurcharan Das writes in the Times of India on “Covid and the bureaucracy: India needs modern institutions that are autonomous, accountable and creditworthy.” He observes that the Indian bureaucracy is a heavy system that is not nimble enough to cope with the crisis. He advocates for a system that is modern with effect utilities that are “autonomous, accountable and creditworthy.”
Bureaucracy in Nagaland needs to be vibrant, innovative, transparent, adaptable and one that can take relevant effective and efficient action. A flexible and adaptable bureaucracy needs to have the capacity to make transitions from taking fire-fighting postures to one that can develop strategic responses to crisis such as Covid. This implies having the courage to move away from the power culture of ‘Yes Sir’ to a culture of integrity and principles where public service and building trust and credibility with the public to which it is responsible for is of the essence. The Covid experience in Nagaland points to the inherent need for Transforming Bureaucracy.
