Abstract:
Theory indicates that local government functions as a site where people on the
periphery engage in decision-making and thereby take part in resource distribution in
the community, thus allowing for a greater degree of democratic participation and
equal citizenship. However, citizens’ participation at the local government level is
extremely poor in Sri Lanka, despite it being the institution closest to the community.
In this context, this paper aims to examine (a) why citizens show almost no interest in
participating in local government, (b) whether there are other forms of participation at
the local government level that are not captured by conventional approaches to
democratic participatory governance, and (c) the impact made by the nature of current
participation in local government on local democracy. This paper is based on field
work carried out in Trincomalee, Panama, and Bandarawela, as part of an evaluation
of a donor-funded programme to increase citizens’ participation in local government.
Key-informant interviews, focus group discussions, and a survey have been used for
data collection. The findings suggest that it is not only politicians but also the
communities that they serve that seek to establish state-society relationships on the
basis ofthe needs of citizens rather than their rights, thus creating a patron-client
relationship instead of the expected state-citizen engagement. Under clientelistic
politics, certain groups within the community enjoy greater access to state resources
and more opportunities to make their voice heard than do others. Those marginalized
constitute a minority in the village and their voices are not heard irrespective of who
is in power, thus leaving democratic engagement as the only way to make their voices
heard.
