Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act, 2013: An Examination of Accountability Mechanisms

Author: Shehla Khaliq, Dr. Warda Yasin 

Abstract

This study looks at how well accountability systems work in the local governments of KP, a province of Pakistan, with an emphasis on assessing how they affect governance and public service delivery. The paper examines a number of accountability mechanisms using a descriptive analysis, including the Local Government Commission, the council, the monitoring committee, the code of conduct committee, and the municipal standing committee. It looks into how these processes are put into practice, how they are carried out, and how they perform. The study outlines the advantages and disadvantages of KP’s existing local government structure, identifying critical elements that either support or undermine its effectiveness. With practical suggestions for legislators and interested parties to strengthen accountability procedures and promote better public administration at the national level, the findings add significant perspectives to the continuing discussion about improving local governance in KP.

Keywords

Local Governments, Accountability, Transparency, Access to Information, Committees.

References

http://giniweb.net/public_accountability/Public%20Accountability%20Institutions%20in%20Pakistan%20and%20Thier%20Macro%20Economic%20Impacts.pdfAhmed Hassan Foundation. (2008). public accountability institutions of Pakistan & their macroeconomic impacts. IDRRCGrant 103655. Retrieved from http://giniweb.net/public_accountability/Public%20Accountability%20Institutions%20in%20Pakistan%20and%20Thier%20Macro%20Economic%20Impacts.pdf.
Akram, R. (Fall 2023). A critical analysis of effectiveness of anti-corruption laws in Pakistan: Policy recommendations. Journal of Public Policy Practitioners, 2(2), 56-72.
Blair, H. (1999). Accountability, Transparency, and Corruption in Decentralized Systems. In Litvack, J. & Seddon, J. (Eds.), Decentralization briefing notes (pp.: 96-99). Washington, D.C., United States of America: World Bank Institute.
Center for Peace and Development Initiatives. (2011). Using right to Information Legislation for Investigative Reports. Report issued by Center for Peace and Development Initiatives. Retrieved from https://cpdi pakistan.org/archives/publication/using-right-to-informationlegislation-for-investigative-reporting.
Cheema, G. S. (1977). Rural local development and rural development in China, India and Pakistan. South Asia Papers, 1(7&8), 1-48.
Gul, N. M., Khan, S., Farid, N., Shah, A. A. & Adeel, M. (2022). Analysis of Effectiveness of AntiCorruption Laws of Pakistan. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(8), 9954-9967.
IFES. (2015). Local government: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. International Foundation for ElectoralSystem. local_government_khyber-pakhtunkhwa.pdf.
Janjua, M. A. (2022). An analysis of KP Local Government Act, 2013 as amended in 2019. Center of
Peace and Development Initiative and Friedrich Naumann Foundation.
Kalin, W. (1999). Decentralization-why and how. In Vuffray, C. (Ed.), Decentralization and
Development (pp.: 46-69). Bern, Switzerland: SDC. 
Khan, A. U. (2016). Paradox of local democracy in provinces: case study of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
Local Government Act, 2013. JPUHS, 29(1), 68-87.
Khan, S. A. (2006). Evolution of the Devolution Plan (2000): Local government system revived or
reformed a study conducted in district Mardan of the NWFP, Pakistan, (Master Thesis 30
Credits Norwegian University of life Sciences, Norway).
Mahmood, M. (2010). The constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Lahore, Pakistan: AlQanoon Publishers.
Manor, J. (1999). The political economy of democratic decentralization. Washington, United States
of America: The World Bank.
Mclougdlin, C. & Scott, Z. (2011). Topic guide on communication and governance. Birmingham,
UK: University of Birmingham.
Morlin, L. (2002, 31st October- 2
ndNovember). What is a “good democracy”? Theory and empirical
analysis. Paper delivered at the conference on ‘The European Union, Nation State, and the
Quality of Democracy: Lesson from Southern Europe’ University of California, Berkeley.
Muriu, A. R. (2013). Decentralization, citizen participation and local public service delivery: A study
on the nature and influence of citizen participation on decentralized service delivery in Kenya,
(Master Dissertation University of Potsdam, Germany).
OECD. (2014). Accountability and Democratic Governance: Orientation and Principles for
Development. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Pak Voter. (2020, June 18). ECP calls for review of delay in local body elections. Retrieved from
https://pakvoter.org/news-events/ecp-calls-for-review-of-delay-in-local-body-elections/.
DOI: 10.52279/jlss.07.01.111 Page | 11
Journal of Law & Social Studies 2025
Reddick, C. G., Demir, T. & Perlman, B. (2020). Horizontal, vertical, and hybrid: an empirical look
at the forms of accountability. Administration & Society, 52(9), 1-29.
Sharma, S. D. (2007). Democracy, good governance, and economic development. Taiwan Journal of
Democracy, 3(1), 29-62.
Singh, U. B. (2009). Decentralized democratic governance in new millennium. New Delhi, India:
Concept Publishing Company.
Smoke, P. (2005). Fiscal decentralization for good governance and effective service delivery:
political, legal framework and implementation strategies. In UN (Ed.), Decentralized
governance for democracy, peace, development and effective service delivery. New York,
United States of America: UN.
Taj, S. & Ur-Rehman, Z. (2016). Role of political parties in Pakistan and perverted form of
democracy. The Dialogue 10(4), 353-356.
UNESC. (2006). Definition of basic concept and terminologies in governance and public
administration. Report of UNESC Committee of Experts on Public Administration, New York,
United States of America.
Weiss, F. & Steiner, S. (2006). Transparency as an element of good governance in the practice of the
EU and WTO: overview and comparison. Fordham International Law Journal, 30(5), 1545-
1586.
Wibbels, E. & Keohane, R. O. (2019). The social underpinning of decentralized governance:
networks, technology and the future of social accountability. In Rodden J. & Wibbels, E.
(Eds.), Decentralized governance and accountability: Academic research and the future of
donor programming (pp.: 14-39). Washington D.C. United States of America: USAID.

DOI: 10.52279/jlss.07.01.111 | 01-11  |  PDF