CITIZEN’S CHARTER

The main objective of the exercise to issue the Citizen’s Charter of an organisation is to improve standard, quality and time frame of service delivery, grievance redress mechanism, transparency and accountability.

This is done by letting people know the mandate of the concerned Ministry/ Department/ Organisation, how one can get in touch with its officials, what to expect by way of services and how to seek a remedy if something goes wrong.

The Citizen’s Charter does not by itself create new legal rights, but it surely helps in enforcing existing rights.

Fist time, the UK’s Citizen’s Charter initiative aroused considerable interest around the world and several countries implemented similar programmes.

Citizen Charter By Government of India:

Over the years, in India, significant progress has been made in the field of economic development. This, along with a substantial increase in the literacy rate has made Indian citizens increasingly aware of their rights. Citizens have become more articulate and expect the administration not merely to respond to their demands but also to anticipate them. It was in this climate that since 1996 a consensus had evolved in the Government on effective and responsive administration.

In a Conference of Chief Ministers of various States and Union Territories held on 24 May, 1997 in New Delhi, presided over by the Prime Minister of India, an “Action Plan for Effective and Responsive Government” at the Centre and State levels was adopted. One of the major decisions at that Conference was that the Central and State Governments would formulate Citizen’s Charters, starting with those sectors that have a large public interface (e.g., Railways, Telecom, Posts, Public Distribution Systems). These Charters were required to include standards of service and time limits that the public can reasonably expect avenues of grievance redress and a provision for independent scrutiny with the involvement of citizen and consumer groups.

Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances, in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India, in its efforts to provide more responsive and citizen-friendly governance coordinates the efforts to formulate and operationalise Citizens’ Charters. Various Central Government Ministries/ Departments/ Organisations have brought out their Citizens’ Charters.

With a view to ensure effective implementation of Citizens’ Charter, Nodal Officers have been appointed in the concerned Central Government Ministries/ Departments/ Organisations.

Similar process can be adopted by State Governments or any other organization.

Primarily an adaptation of the UK model, the Indian Citizen’s Charter has an additional component of ‘expectations from the clients’ or in other words ‘obligations of the users’.

GOOD GOVERNANCE: Transparency + Accountability + Citizen Friendliness => Citizen’s Charter.

Good Governance is the Technology Citizen’s Charter is the Tool

The spirit behind the Citizen’s Charter:

A customer is the most important visitor on our premises. He is not dependent on us; we are dependent on him. He is not an interruption on our work; he is the purpose of it. He is not an outsider on our business; he is part of it. We are not doing him a favour by serving him; he is doing a favour by giving us an opportunity to do so. (Mahatma Gandhi)

What is a Citizen’s Charter?

Citizen’s Charter is a document which represents a systematic effort to focus on the commitment of the Organisation towards its Citizens in respects of Standard of Services, Information, Choice and Consultation, Non-discrimination and Accessibility, Grievance Redress, Courtesy and Value for Money. This also includes expectations of the Organisation from the Citizen for fulfilling the commitment of the Organisation.

Who is a ‘Citizen’ with reference to Citizen’s Charter?

The term ‘Citizen’ in the Citizen’s Charter implies the clients or customers whose interests and values are addressed by the Citizen’s Charter and, therefore, includes not only the citizens but also all the stakeholders, i.e., citizens, customers, clients, users, beneficiaries, other Ministries/ Departments/ Organisations, State Governments, UT Administrations etc.

What Citizens Expect From Government Departments/Service Providers:

• Reliability, i.e., consistency in performance.
• Responsiveness, i.e., timely service.
• Credibility i.e., having customer interest at heart.
• Empathy, i.e., attention to customer’s needs.
• Courtesy and care, i.e., physical evidence of willingness to serve

The principles of the Citizen’s Charter:

• Quality: Improving the quality of services;
• Choice: Providing choice wherever possible;
• Standards: Specify what to expect and how to act if standards are not met;
• Value: Add value for the taxpayers’ money;
• Accountability: Be accountable to individuals and organisations; and
• Transparency: Ensure transparency in Rules/Procedures/Schemes/Grievances.

These were later elaborated by the Labour Government of UK as following nine principles of Service Delivery (1998):

• Set standards of service
• Be open and provide full information
• Consult and involve
• Encourage access and the promotion of choice
• Treat all fairly
• Put things right when they go wrong
• Use resources effectively
• Innovate and improve
• Work with other provider

Work Culture

Work culture represents the collective values, beliefs and principles of organization and employee and is a product of such factors as history, product, market, technology, and strategy, type of employees, management style, and national culture. Work culture is a concept which deals in the study of:

• Beliefs, thought processes, attitudes of the employees.
• Ideologies and principles of the organization.

It is the work culture which decides the way employees interact with each other and how an organization functions. In layman’s language work culture refers to the mentality of the employees which further decides the ambience of the organization. Work culture is the environment that surrounds you at work all of the time.

An organization is said to have a strong work culture when the employees follow the organization’s rules and regulations and adhere to the existing guidelines.

Work culture plays an important role in extracting the best out of employees and making them stick to the organization for a longer duration. A healthy work culture leads to satisfied employees and an increased productivity.The organization must offer a positive ambience to the employees for them to concentrate on their work rather than interfering in each other’s work.

How to improve the work Culture?

1. Employees must be cordial with each other

One must respect his fellow worker. Backbiting is considered strictly unprofessional and must be avoided for a healthy work culture. One gains nothing out of conflicts and nasty politics at work.

2. Each employee should be treated as one

Partiality leads to demotivated employees and eventually an unhealthy work culture. Employees should be judged only by their work and nothing else. Personal relationships should take a backseat at the workplace.

3. Appreciating the top performers is important

Praise the employees to expect good work from them every time. Give them a pat on their back. Let them feel indispensable for their organization. Don’t criticize the ones who have not performed well, instead ask them to pull up their socks for the next time. Give them one more opportunity rather than firing them immediately.

4. Encourage discussions at the workplace

Employees must discuss issues among themselves to reach to better conclusions. Each one should have the liberty to express his views. The team leaders and managers must interact with the subordinates frequently. Transparency is essential at all levels for better relationships among employees and a healthy work culture. Manipulating information and data tampering is a strict no no at the workplace. Let information flow in its desired form.

5. Organization must have employee friendly policies and practical guidelines

Expecting an employee to work till late night on his birthday is simply impractical. Rules and regulations should be made to benefit the employees. Employees must maintain the decorum of the organization. Discipline is important at the workplace.

6. The dictatorial approach must be avoided

Bosses should be more like mentors to the employees. The team leaders should be a source of inspiration for the subordinates. The superiors are expected to provide a sense of direction to the employees and guide them whenever needed. The team members should have an easy access to their boss’s cabin.

Develop a system that encourages employees to take risks for the betterment of the organization without the threat of punishment and find ways of helping them learn from their mistakes

7. Promote team building activities to bind the employees together

Conduct training programs, workshops, seminars and presentations to upgrade the existing skills of the employees. Prepare them for the tough times. They should be ready under any odd circumstances or change in the work culture.

8. Human Resource Development

Provide opportunities within the organization for people to develop to their full potential. How does the company deal with obsolescence? Are old or unneeded people fired? Does management give credit to those outgoing people for their career contributions? Or is the prevailing attitude, “what have you do for me lately?” How honourably the company acts in these situations will do much to determine whether or not it has a culture of success.

9. Decision-Making Structure

We tend to forget that the main purpose of structure is to facilitate decision making, not to develop new organizational charts and lines of authority.

Make sure that there is a free flow of information for decision making throughout the organization, and that the structure for disseminating that information allows positive outcomes.

10. Organizational Clarity

The degree to which the goals and plans of the organization are clearly perceived by its members rises in proportion to the employees” feelings of involvement in the goal-setting and planning procedures. Fostering this feeling of involvement and direction is more important than presenting lists of objectives and detailed plans. To promote organizational clarity, involve all members of the organization in the goal-setting and planning process.

11. Strong Team Spirit

As social beings, we naturally seek support from our peers and seek to belong to a group. Come tough times, the team should come together to deal with whatever problems are out there. This is where a sense of unity is evoked in the team and employees will no longer just feel that they’re working for themselves. They are now working towards something bigger than themselves, and as a team. Instilling a strong team spirit is not easy because it involves the acceptance and tolerance of differences in perspectives and working styles between teammates. There is a need for them to see that they’re working towards a common goal before they can look beyond the differences.

Integrity/Probity in Public Life

Integrity and probity in public life are the standards that society expects those elected or appointed to public office to observe and maintain in the conduct of the public affairs to which they have been entrusted. These standards are what safeguard the nation from corruption by politicians and public officials who have been given almost unrestricted access to public resources together with the power to take decisions that impact on the lives of everyone and the nation as a whole. It follows that those in positions of power can use these positions to take decisions that are solely in the public interest or they can use them to benefit themselves, friends, and in the case of politicians, their party supporters to the exclusion of others. There is mounting evidence, documented by Transparency International among others, that given their privileged position those in power can and sometimes do inflict immense, often irreparable, damage on the country by acting in any other than in the public interest. This, essentially, is the rationale for the legislative and other measures that countries take to govern the behaviour of their public officials. The absence of integrity and probity in public life is manifested in corruption which is a worldwide phenomenon. But its impact is strongest and most pervasive in small states that already suffer from all the known disadvantages that characterise smallness such as unfavourable economies of scale, high per capita cost of government, remoteness, and distance from large markets and centres of large populations among others. In addition to all these, small States also tend to suffer from ineffective parliamentary oversight, weak and undeveloped systems of checks and balances like a strong and independent media as well as civil society groups with the capacity to investigate, challenge and call to account those in positions of power. Leaders who are corrupt will exploit these weaknesses to the fullest to enrich themselves and those closest to them at the expense of the country.

The debilitating effects of corruption are well documented. For example for Latin America and the Caribbean as a whole the Inter-American Development Bank has estimated that on average some 10% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is lost to corruption annually. In some countries this proportion has been estimated to be as high as one quarter (1/4). It is no wonder that both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have identified corruption as one of the main obstacles to development. It stultifies creativity, inventiveness and enterprise in a people, and puts a brake on the growth of democracy, all of which are essential conditions for development.  It cannot be assumed that all parliamentarians and other people in public life engage in corrupt practices; far from it. The vast majority of public officials both elected and appointed give sterling and dedicated service to the country. They keep alive and constantly seek to enrich the best traditions of selfless public service. These officials need to be encouraged and their contributions recognised. The best way to give such encouragement and recognition is to call to account those who will not play by the rules. Rooting out corruption is not an easy task. It will not happen in one big swoop nor will it happen by legislation alone. It needs a national objective in which all the citizens, agencies and institutions must play their part. This means that Government, political parties, the private sector, civil society, religious leaders and, most importantly, the media need to work together to ensure that nothing but the highest standard of behaviour, accountability and transparency are tolerated in governance across all aspects of society. There needs to be something like a national crusade dedicated to the maintenance of a culture of decency and integrity in public life. Without that a small country like Dominica runs the risk of degenerating into a failed state because its democratic foundations will have been eroded, the rule of law compromised and offices of state and institutions undermined to the extent where they lose their legitimacy. In this situation, true, genuine and enlightened leadership will not emerge leaving the way open for unscrupulous leaders and their associates to manipulate an unsuspecting population and turn national assets into private wealth. Once corruption is allowed to take root it becomes increasingly difficult to eradicate because more and more of the population begin to see themselves as beneficiaries and they will want to keep things that way.In its 2008 Global Corruption Report, Transparency International draws a link between poverty, failed institutions and graft:"The continuing high levels of corruption and poverty plaguing many of the world’s societies amount to an ongoing humanitarian disaster and cannot be tolerated. Stemming corruption requires strong oversight through Parliament, law enforcement, independent media and a vibrant civil society. When these institutions are weak corruption spirals out of control with horrendous consequences for ordinary people and for justice ......"(Transparency International 2008 Corruption Perception Index) Special mention must be made of the private sector. In societies where a blind eye is turned to corruption elements in the private sector give bribes to those exercising power in order to curry favour. The giving and taking of bribes leads not only to personal enrichment but also to wrong decision-making with consequential misallocation of national resources into high profile "political" projects that will attract votes at the expense of less spectacular but economically and socially more useful ones. Development assistance provided by friendly donor governments and the donor community can also be misused in this way – for private gain or to confer an advantage to certain individuals or groups, or buy votes. The more reputable donor agencies, both official and private, are alive to this danger. That is why they put increasing emphasis on aid coordination and the sharing of information and experiences. They need to do more especially in terms of oversight of the behaviour of official agencies of donor countries and private corporations operating within their borders because regrettably, these are, themselves, sometimes party to corrupt behaviour, or they turn a blind eye, if not actively encourage it. Integrity legislation is only part of the answer, albeit an important part. As Transparency International and the Commonwealth Secretariat have observed in the introduction to a recent joint study: "Questions of law are ultimately able to be resolved by the courts. Matters of ethics are, almost by definition, unable to be resolved by resort to rules of law". (Conflict of Interest: Legislators, Ministers, and Public Officials) The Dominica Integrity in Public Office Act includes three broad areas where an infringement could attract criminal proceedings, namely:

Every person in public life is required to file with the Integrity Commission, within three months of the end of the financial year, a declaration setting out:

• his office or offices;
• his income assets and liabilities;
• the assets of his wife, children or relative acquired through or traceable to his income; and
• gifts made by him in value exceeding one thousand dollars.
• Every person in public life shall observe the body of rules known as the Code of Conduct, specified in the Second Schedule
  It is in the Code of Conduct that Parliament has set out in very clear terms the standard of behaviour expected of public officials in the performance of their public duties and the ethics and values that should govern that behaviour.
• Possession of Unaccountable Property

Parliament has made it an offence, under this provision of the Act for a person in public life to be found in possession of property or pecuniary resources disproportionate to his legitimate sources of income. (Sometimes referred to as illicit enrichment).

In all of these areas an infringement, or in the case of the Code of Conduct, a breach of the Code, is a criminal offence punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both. But by itself legislation can only achieve so much. Integrity and probity in public life demand that those elected or appointed to public office are themselves imbued with a sense of responsibility to the society that puts them there; that the decisions they take should always be solely in terms of the public interest and not to gain benefits for themselves, family, friends or associates; that they act with honesty and integrity by not allowing their private interests to conflict with their public responsibilities; and that the behaviour must always be able to stand up to the closest public scrutiny. Similarly, civil society and institutions have a crucial role to play by calling to account those who will flout the rules and by refusing to tolerate any but the highest standard of behaviour in those who they elect or appoint to serve the public interest.