Citizen and the State

The Statesman

1. Introduction and Context

This editorial examines the evolving dynamic between the Indian citizen and the administrative state, arguing that India’s bureaucracy continues to carry colonial-era traits of hierarchy, opacity, and command-oriented functioning.
Despite decades of democratic evolution, citizens often experience governance as top-down, rule-bound, and compliance-driven.

The article positions current reform initiatives — Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas, Sabka Prayas and Mission Karmayogi — as attempts to recalibrate governance toward participation, transparency, and trust-building.
It advocates a systemic shift from control-centric administration to a citizen-centric, technology-enabled governance ecosystem.

2. Key Arguments Presented

a. Colonial Legacy and Citizen–State Distance

The author highlights that India’s bureaucratic architecture was originally designed for surveillance and control, not democratic empowerment.
Even today, procedural rigidities, documentation burdens, and bureaucratic gatekeeping create barriers for ordinary citizens accessing public services.

b. Democratizing Governance: The Four Pillars Framework

The article interprets the Prime Minister’s governance doctrine as a philosophical reorientation:

• Sabka Saath — inclusive development.
• Sabka Vikas — equal opportunity rather than mere welfare expansion.
• Sabka Vishwas — building trust between citizen and institution.
• Sabka Prayas — co-creation of outcomes through participatory governance.

This framework is presented as a counter-narrative to paternalistic bureaucracy.

c. Information + Trust = Good Governance

The author argues that information asymmetry is the root of mistrust.
Concentration of data and decision-making within institutions reduces accountability.
Democratizing information through transparency and open data can make citizens active partners rather than passive recipients.

d. Mission Karmayogi as a Structural Reform

Mission Karmayogi is highlighted as a transformative reform to modernize bureaucratic culture.
It aims to cultivate:

• continuous learning
• digital governance skills
• empathy in service delivery
• ethical leadership

The reform seeks to shift civil servants from “authority holders” to “public service facilitators.”

e. Digital Public Infrastructure as a Bridge

Platforms such as IndiaStack, MyGov, and digital grievance systems are reducing friction between state and citizen.
However, the author warns that digital inclusion must be universal, otherwise technology could deepen inequality.

3. Author’s Stance

The author adopts a progressive and reformist stance.
They appreciate reforms like Mission Karmayogi but argue that deeper behavioural and institutional changes are still required.

The tone is constructive — supportive of reform, yet mindful of systemic inertia.
The central argument: trust, transparency, and empathy must replace command, opacity, and hierarchy.

4. Bias and Limitations

Bias

• Favourable tilt toward the central government’s reform vision.
• Tends to accept the slogans (Sabka Saath etc.) at face value without political critique.

Limitations

• Underplays ground realities such as local-level corruption, capacity deficits, and administrative bottlenecks.
• Does not critically analyse digital risks — data privacy, algorithmic bias, exclusion of the digitally unskilled.
• Limited discussion of political accountability and the role of elected representatives.

5. Pros and Cons of the Argument

Pros

• Conceptual clarity on governance philosophy and citizen empowerment.
• Strong linkages to civil service reforms and democratic values.
• Moral depth, emphasizing trust, empathy, and accountability.

Cons

• Idealistic assumptions about bureaucratic behavioural change.
• Limited field evidence demonstrating effectiveness of reforms.
• Technocratic optimism without addressing real infrastructural and capacity gaps.

6. Policy Implications

1. Deepen Administrative Accountability
• Integrate citizen feedback metrics into officer evaluations.
2. Expand Mission Karmayogi
• Include panchayats, municipalities, frontline workers.
3. Institutionalize Participatory Governance
• Social audits, public consultations, participatory budgeting.
4. Strengthen Transparency Mechanisms
• Mandate proactive disclosures under open data initiatives.
5. Promote Ethical Civil Service Culture
• Regular ethics training, citizen-centric KPIs, service charters.

7. Alignment with UPSC GS Papers

GS Paper II – Governance

• Citizen–state relationship
• Civil service reforms
• Transparency, accountability, participatory democracy

GS Paper III – Technology

• Role of DPI, e-governance in service delivery

GS Paper IV – Ethics

• Empathy, integrity, service orientation
• Trust-based governance and ethical administration

8. Real-World Impact

If implemented effectively, such reforms will:

• make bureaucracy more responsive and accountable
• enhance trust in institutions
• broaden citizen participation in policymaking
• reduce grievance pendency and red-tapism

However, without behavioural reform and institutional willingness, these initiatives risk becoming symbolic rather than transformative.

9. Conclusion and Future Perspective

The article convincingly argues that governance in the 21st century must shift from bureaucratic control to democratic collaboration.
India’s future administrative legitimacy will depend not on the state’s authority but on its willingness to share information, power, and decision-making with citizens.

Mission Karmayogi and digital public infrastructure provide a foundation, but the true transformation lies in cultivating a bureaucracy rooted in humility, service, and public trust.
The Indian state must evolve into a partner rather than a patriarch, making governance an inclusive and participatory endeavour.