 |
|
That those in positions of authority should publicly account
for their decisions and use of public resources has long
been a tenet of democratic theory. The information revealed
by systems of accountability, it is argued, will permit
the electorate to judge the quality of policies and the
integrity of implementation so that the most able and honest
can be selected to govern. More recently, the notion of
accountability has been linked to that of economic development
as a central element of the ‘good governance’
that some believe to be positively associated with higher
rates of economic growth and improved levels of human welfare.
Public accountability, it is postulated, leads to the selection
of policies that will promote development and ensures that
public resources are used to yield their greatest return
on investment. The World Bank, the European Council, Commonwealth
Heads of Government, the UK’s Overseas Development
Administration and the Heads of State of the Organisation
of African Unity, amongst others, have all linked accountability
to economic development in the early 1990s.
Despite the hypothesised importance of
accountability in the processes of governance and development
there have been few detailed studies exploring the precise
nature of accountability in Asian countries. This paper
seeks to fill this gap by examining political and administrative
accountability in Sri Lanka since independence, with a particular
focus on public expenditure management. It commences with
a discussion of the concept of ‘accountability’.
This is followed by a brief description of the Sri Lankan
background and public expenditure trends in the country.
The main parts of the paper then examine the changing nature
of ex-ante and ex-post accountability and the functioning
of the ‘watchdogs’ that police the system. It
is found that accountability has eroded steadily since the
early 1970s with a rapid deterioration from 1989 till 1992.
This paper deals with the period upto 1993. There has been
some improvement in accountability since 1993, but the period
is too close and too short to evaluate at present. The new
government which took office in 1994 has exposed several
areas in which the previous government flouted accountability.
The concluding sections explore the reasons for the weakening
of political and administrative accountability in the country,
speculate on what is likely to happen in the future, and
shed light on the theoretical issue of the relationship
between public accountability and the processes of economic
development.
Table of Contents:
- Introduction
- The Concept of Accountability
- Background
- Ex-ante Accountability: Public Expenditure Strategy
and Budgetary Process
- Ex-post Accountability: Intentions and Outcomes
- The Watchdogs: the Toothless and the Muzzled?
- Explaining the Weakening of Public Accountability
- Conclusion
|
|
