The recent District Development Coordination and Monitoring Committee (DISHA) meeting in Mokokchung offered valuable insights into the state of development in the district. The discussions revealed important realities: farmers lack assured markets, a collection centre established to support agricultural activities is not functioning, departments implementing related schemes need better coordination, and government livestock facilities face operational challenges.
Yet, it is worth noting that much of this information entered the public domain only because journalists were present at the meeting.
Government information is not the private property of departments. Data relating to public schemes, infrastructure, expenditure, beneficiaries and implementation challenges belong to the people who fund and are affected by these programmes. Transparency should not depend on whether the media happens to attend a meeting. It should be an established practice of governance.
The DISHA meeting demonstrated the importance of media access to official proceedings. Without journalists present, many of these issues would have remained within the confines of a government conference hall. The public would not have known that farmers are being encouraged to produce more while market linkages remain uncertain, or that infrastructure created for farmers is lying unused.
This raises the need for a stronger culture of proactive disclosure. District administrations and departments should regularly publish minutes of important review meetings, progress reports of government schemes, status of infrastructure projects, fund utilisation details and measurable outcomes on their official websites.
Publishing meeting minutes is not about exposing government shortcomings. Rather, it is about building public confidence and encouraging better administration. When problems are openly acknowledged, solutions can be discussed more effectively. Silence, on the other hand, allows inefficiency to continue unnoticed.
Transparency also strengthens journalism. Reporters cannot hold institutions accountable without access to reliable information. A lack of publicly available data forces journalists to depend heavily on official statements and occasional briefings, limiting their ability to analyse whether policies are delivering the intended results. An informed press requires an informed government.
Democracy does not end with casting votes. It depends on citizens having access to information to evaluate decisions, question failures and appreciate achievements. A citizen who does not know what is happening cannot meaningfully participate in governance. Modern governance demands that information flow naturally from public institutions to the public.
The DISHA meeting was a positive example of openness because the media was present. The larger lesson, however, is that transparency should become routine, not accidental. Government offices should not merely hold meetings; they should ensure that the knowledge generated in those meetings reaches the people they serve.
An accountable government is not one that avoids criticism. It is one that creates the conditions where criticism, discussion and public participation can improve governance.
