CURE Bill Scores Low on Accountability, Citizen Participation: NGO Analysis
New Delhi, March 18: A detailed analysis of the Core Urban Region (Integrated Governance) Bill, 2026 by the voluntary organisation Janaagraha has revealed significant gaps in accountability and citizen participation. The 271-page Bill mentions the word 'consultation' seven times, 'participation' five times and 'accountability' only once, while 'government' appears 475 times and 'commissioner' 780 times. Although 'public' is used 290 times, it refers to citizens as passive recipients rather than active participants, according to Janaagraha's presentation.
At a press conference on Tuesday, Janaagraha representatives Anita Kumar, V. R. Vachana and Srikara Prasad, who were part of the study team, explained how they assessed the CURE Bill against the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Act, 1955, and the recently promulgated Greater Bengaluru Governance (GBG) Act, 2024. They scored all three based on city planning, powers of elected representatives, transparency and accountability, citizens' participation, and institutional delivery capacity. The CURE Bill scored 5% over the GHMC Act but 10% less than the GBG Act, indicating substantial room for improvement.
The team credited Hyderabad as only the second city after Bengaluru to have a legislation for metropolitan governance. However, they flagged lack of clarity on the roles of new authorities and institutions, absence of coordinating bodies, and insufficient provisions for public participation as major drawbacks. Instead of legislating key urban reforms, the Bill leaves critical details to government rules.
Janaagraha recommended that the metropolitan region be planned as a single unit with clearly defined roles for the Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC), the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), and the Chief Minister-led Apex Governance Council. It also called for adequate representation of elected local bodies in the Apex Council to ensure democratic anchoring of metropolitan coordination and implementation.
The organisation emphasised that the roles, powers, funding, and staffing of over 15 authorities, committees, and cells proposed under the Bill should be clearly defined to avoid overlaps and ensure accountability. It recommended strengthening the powers of mayors and municipal councils, creating meaningful avenues for citizen participation, and establishing independent oversight mechanisms. It also urged that key governance reforms be made mandatory and implemented within fixed timelines.
