Home Governance Expectation of Good Governance: Basic Right as a Citizen?

Expectation of Good Governance: Basic Right as a Citizen?

Although governance has not been precisely defined in political literature, United Nations (UN) Members often look up to the definition by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in its 1997 policy paper, which defined governance as “the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises the mechanisms, processes and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences”. While asserting control over a country, good governance would include the appropriate allocation of funds to meet the needs of its citizens and ensure accountability while doing so. While, of course, it is impossible to satiate every single individual’s needs or wants, there are a few basic and collective expectations that citizens may feel the urge to receive and complain about when it is not met. They will have an expectation of receiving it since their government is in charge of meeting their obligations. 

Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation connects two concepts: legitimate and expectation. Something becomes legitimate from past actions or backed up by promise. Unless someone gives you the assurance of it happening, one cannot legitimately rely on it, e.g., it is common that doctors have sworn to treat us; otherwise, without any reasonable cause, if they decline, that would be unnatural practice. Similarly, if the government expressly promised during elections to serve us with uninterrupted water and gas supply from WASA, it is expected that every area will look upon the government for that. This gives rise to expectations from the public based upon past actions and promises; the public will expect to receive treatment in times of need and that they receive constant water and gas supplies. A public authority has a duty to act with fairness and consistency in its dealing with the public, and if it makes inconsistent decisions unfairly or unjustly, it misuses its power (see, (2002) 22 BLD (AD) 199).

In the case The Local Government and Engineering Department, the People’s Republic of Bangladesh v Kazi Mizanur Rahman and Others 32 BLD (AD) 177, in 2012, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD) held: 

The doctrine of legitimate expectation is a concept which is akin to that a promissory estoppel and this concept has been developed in the European Community Law. According to the doctrine, where a person is the victim of an unfavourable decision taken by a public authority, this may amount to an infringement of that person’s legitimate expectation, where, for example, the decision contradicts an earlier promise or course of conduct on the part of the public authority concerned. Therefore, this doctrine is circumscribed by certain limitations and exceptions. The first and foremost consideration is that there must be a foundation in the petition claiming legitimate expectation and secondly, there must be a promise or a representation on the part of the public authority on the claim of the persons aggrieved by the decision.

In other words, the legitimate expectation is the principle of fair treatment and non-arbitrariness by the authorities in power. It is not the same as anticipation or desire. A desire or a hope, no matter how honest and sincere they are and how firmly one expects them to be fulfilled, does not constitute an assertable expectation, and a mere disappointment does not have legal repercussions

Whereas an expectation’s validity may only be inferred if it is founded on the sanction of law, custom, or a well-established procedure in a regular and natural system. An example is that, for years, people entered the Office of the District Commissioner (D.C.) however abruptly, without any prior notice or announcement, out of the blue, one bright day the officer forbids any citizen to go inside. This abrupt interruption in years-long normality violates the doctrine of legitimate expectation. 

However, are our expectations that absolute or unachievable? Is it unreasonable– to expect a proper drainage system in the neighbourhood and expect routine maintenance work of the roads as per the existing Ministry directives? Or, not expect a proper flood management system as a necessity which would otherwise result in missing children & women trafficking, loss of land, water-based diseases and sanitation concerns? How about ensuring that the hard earned tax money is being utilised for governance, not as anyone’s great-grandchild’s post-retirement budget allocation? An assurance that the officials from the authority would aid and serve them with honesty? Are they mere disappointments for citizens or a ticking time bomb for greater travesty and turmoil? Innate expectations would arise nevertheless from guardians, and it is a natural relationship between a citizen and its guardian, the government. 

We, citizens, have also accustomed ourselves to the “normal” and want no further dealing with any concerns unless they would one day get deadly for us on a personal level. In the case of M. P. Oil Extraction and Anr. etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. (1997), the Court ruled how “the doctrine of ‘legitimate expectation’ operates in the domain of public law and, in appropriate cases, constitutes a substantive and enforceable right.” If only we were to actively enforce its application as citizens, the possibilities could be a tad more effective and not just mere expectations that see no light of day. 

The doctrine of legitimate expectations not only protects the certainty that citizens expect from the state but also protects the legitimate expectations that arise from the trust that citizens put in the words and actions of those conducting the affairs of the republic. Good guardianship depends upon the trust that exists between the state and its citizens so upholding the legitimate expectation is crucial. 

Sayere Nazabi Sayem
Sayere Nazabi Sayem is an alumnus of the Department of Law, North South University. Apart from publishing opinion writings all around the world on pressing social issues and advocating for human rights, she has worked as the Head of Research at Bangladesh Forum for Legal and Humanitarian Affairs (BFLHA). She is currently serving as an Assistant Editor at Progress Magazine and Editor of the NSU Law Blog.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here