1

DAILY
CLASS NOTES
Governance

Lecture – 03
Citizen Charter and Social Audit
 2

Citizen Charter and Social Audit

Topics to be covered:
1. Citizen charters
2. Social audit
Citizen charter:
❖ A Charter is literally an agreement between two parties.
❖ A Citizen's Charter represents a mutual agreement between two parties: the citizens and the government.
❖ It represents the commitment of the Organisation towards standard, quality, and time frame of service
delivery, grievance redress mechanism, transparency, and accountability.
❖ 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 operationalize Citizens' Charters.
Origin/genesis of Citizen Charter
❖ The concept of the Citizens' Charter enshrines the trust between the service provider and its users.
❖ The concept was first articulated and implemented in the United Kingdom by the Conservative
Government of John Major in 1991 as a national Programme with a simple aim to continuously improve the
quality of public services for the people of the country so that these services respond to the needs and wishes
of the users.
❖ The Programme was re-launched in 1998 by the Labour Government of Tony Blair which rechristened it
Services First.
❖ This concept was founded on the principle that citizens, as contributors to the public purse through taxes,
have a legitimate expectation of receiving the highest quality public services in return.
❖ In the Indian context, the introduction of the Citizen's Charter took root during a Chief Ministers'
Conference.
❖ At this gathering, it was collectively acknowledged that India should embrace the mechanism of Citizen's
Charters, which had gained popularity in countries like Britain.
❖ The primary objective was to combat corruption, with a particular focus on government departments that
engage extensively with the public, such as telecommunications and railways.
❖ This initiative marked a significant shift as, for the first time, citizens were granted the power to address
their concerns through choices made available to them.
❖ These choices inherently fostered competition among government departments, resulting in increased
efficiency.
❖ The ultimate goal was to provide citizens with a means to resolve their issues, ensure transparency in public
service delivery, and promote accountability in governance.
 3

Need for citizen charter:

❖ Community participation is essential for good
governance.
❖ A citizen encounters various problems while dealing
with government organizations. Citizen charter is a
quest to solve the problems faced by citizens in
dealing with public authorities.
❖ They are voluntary commitments made by
bureaucracy towards citizens regarding works done
by them in stipulated time periods.
❖ A Citizen's Charter serves as a tool to enhance
transparency in government or public service
operations.
❖ They can lead to increased efficiency in government
operations.
❖ A well-implemented Citizen's Charter can improve the public perception of government agencies.
Features of citizen charter:
❖ Standard of services that is what to expect.
❖ Range of services
❖ Quality of services
❖ Maintaining transparency.
❖ Value for taxpayers money
❖ Citizen charters are voluntary commitments made by bureaucracy.
❖ Citizen charter is prepared in consultation with citizens
❖ Citizen charter provides information about finances i.e., the amount of money which is to be spent by
bureaucracy.
❖ Provides a timeframe within which problems of going to be solved.
Performance of citizen charter in India:
❖ Most of the citizens are not even aware of the citizen charter.
❖ Citizen charter was formulated by departments without consulting citizens and in the process defeating the
very purpose of citizen charter.
❖ Proper Grievance redressal mechanism is also absent. If a citizen charter is not implemented properly then
there is no other mechanism for citizens to get their problems solved.
❖ Departments have not understood the philosophy behind the Citizen Charter.
❖ Citizen charters formulated by government Departments have merely written promises.
❖ All offices under a particular department do not have a uniform citizen charter.
❖ Performance of bureaucracy in the implementation of citizen charter has no impact on their career
advancement i,e, promotion, transfer, etc.
 4

Reform measures with respect to citizen charter:

❖ Citizen charter is nothing but pious declarations made by ministries and departments that do not serve specific
problems, which is why the following suggestions can be implemented:
➢ Bureaucracy should make few promises but try to deliver those promises.
➢ There should be proper Grievance redressal mechanisms for the citizens.
➢ Formulation of citizen’s charter should involve consultations with civil society and other stakeholders.
➢ There should be a general awareness campaign about the citizen's charter.
➢ Officers who have failed to adhere to the principles of citizen charter should be held accountable.
➢ Implementation of the citizens' charter can be made binding on bureaucracy. According to the 2nd
Administrative Reform Commission (ARC), the citizen charter should be linked with the career graph
of bureaucracy.
➢ There should be regular evaluation of citizen charter through an external agency.
Social Audit
❖ The term "audit" indeed refers to the examination of financial transactions and other records to ensure
accuracy and compliance with established standards.
❖ There are different types of audits, including
1. Government audit
2. Private audit
3. Social audit
Government Audit:
❖ Government audits primarily focus on examining the financial transactions and operations of government
entities or public institutions.
❖ The findings of government audits are typically accepted and considered official by the government itself.
These audits aim to ensure that government resources are used efficiently and in compliance with applicable
laws and regulations.
Private Audit:
❖ Private audits are conducted by private organizations, such as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
or private companies, to assess their financial transactions and operations.
❖ The findings of private audits are not typically accepted by the government because private audits are
conducted independently of government oversight.
❖ Private entities conduct these audits to ensure transparency and accountability within their organizations.
Social Audit:
❖ Social audits are conducted by civil society organizations, and sometimes government agencies, as well as
Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in some cases.
❖ The primary focus of social audits is on the outcomes and impact of government programs or initiatives,
rather than just the financial transactions or outputs.
❖ An example of a social audit is the examination of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) to assess its impact on rural employment and livelihoods.
 5

❖ Need for Social Audit

➢ In a developing nation like ours, where substantial financial resources are allocated to welfare programs,
there is a pressing need for social audits. These audits serve as a means of public oversight of the
government's expenditure on welfare initiatives.
➢ The primary emphasis is on evaluating the results achieved.
➢ The key objectives include ensuring transparency, assessing the efficiency of programs, scrutinizing
whether government priorities align with the actual needs of the population, and examining the practical
implementation by the government.
➢ It is evident that there exists a significant gap between government intentions, citizen requirements, and
the actual execution of these programs. (Huge disconnect between meeting what the government thinks
you need, what actually people need, and what is actually being done by the government)

   