Pakistan is heading into another election campaign. Though election time should be regarded as a time when the masses are given the right to express their opinion in 5 years, it seems that the misgovernance by the previous party in power is bringing this into question. The fact that weak governance is one of the major causes of failure adding to the levels of bureaucracy in the country are hardly ever proclaimed in the election manifestos and public pronouncements.
Political leaders are the ones who give bureaucracy the directions it needs to take. Pakistan’s centralized system of bureaucracy was inherited from colonial rule by the British. Pakistan adjusted well with the post-division era, even with the influx of a huge number of refugees. Reforming the system under the rule of Ayub Khan and Yahya Khan turned out to be a complete failure, ending with the segregation of East Pakistan in to Bangladesh.
In the third attempt to reform by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the constitutional security given to civil servants was taken away, and lateral entry was introduced in its place. This opened the door for political interference into general bureaucracy. Mostly, power is deployed by posting and transferring favorable people. A head of an organization or a secretary is hardly given enough time to settle down before his post is changed or he’s made into an officer on special duty (OSD). An OSD basically has no work.
Donors have recently started to come with new and bright ideas on how to reform the civil service. The ideas have been declared impractical, but the money has been either used or added to Pakistan’s debt. A bureaucracy that cannot carry out its real function to collect revenue and preserve order could hardly be expected to tackle the country’s economic and social problems. If the civil service is not reformed, people must get ready to hear the new government’s rendition of how everything is the bureaucracy’s fault. The American spoil system may be considered a solution to give implementation of manifesto a fair chance. The winning party should have the right to decide who will occupy the top positions. When the government leaves, this set of people leave too and do not remain behind to swell the already swollen ranks of redundant bureaucrats.
It seems though, that the implication of the Eighteenth Amendment to Constitution has not been fully understood yet. Centralized services will probably not do much good, with all the resources and subjects given over to provincial development. It looks as the local governments will be brought to life again. If service-delivery was to take the front seat, the bureaucrats of an organization should be chosen by the organization itself. Foreign officers may be appointed by the government, but police service and provincial officials need to be lobbied for. Provinces should also not be allowed to dictate the appointment of teachers or doctors for districts. Finally, the Planning council should be working with not only the National Economic Council but the Council of Common Interest and must allot professionals according to the requirements.
View the Original article
0 comments:
Post a Comment