Saturday, November 2, 2019

Business Recorder Editorial November 2, 2019

Civil servants’ woes

A recent federal secretaries’ meeting has delivered a serious warning about the effects of the National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB’s) operations against bureaucrats. They have described these operations and the modus operandi of NAB as “intolerable”, “not acceptable”, and have demanded immediate amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) before the work ethic of the civil service is permanently impaired. The secretaries found that instead of checking corruption to improve governance, which is the ostensible purpose of NAB, it has become a hindrance to better service delivery and good governance. The minutes of the secretaries’ meeting, according to a media report, reveal the bureaucracy’s complete lack of confidence in NAB and its working. In particular, the practice of arrest and summons on trivial grounds, ostensibly aimed at (or at least resulting in) the humiliation of well-respected civil servants has been castigated as being against the principles of good governance and therefore unacceptable. What is also intolerable as far as these senior bureaucrats are concerned is the issuance of summons and warrants of senior functionaries on issues of policy formulation. The meeting laments that in spite of verbal assurances in the past, there has been no let-up in intimidation through summons of officers without substantive evidence against them. The need of the hour therefore, the federal secretaries argue, is to transform such assurances into legal protection through substantive amendments in the law. The secretaries noted that the tragic episodes of arrest and disgrace of even retired officers will haunt them and their families for a long time (and arguably act as a major disincentive to the best minds joining the civil service). What is worrisome about the whole accountability drive is the reversal of the time-honoured principle of justice that assumes the innocence of the accused until proven in a court of law through irrefutable evidence. Here the NAO, promulgated by military dictator General Pervez Musharraf as a tool to target politicians and others opposed to him and which subsequent civilian elected governments of the Pakistan People’s Party and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz regrettably failed to reform if not repeal, presumes the guilt of the accused and shifts the burden of proving his/her innocence on their shoulders, in a complete reversal of the principles of justice and due process. The secretaries committee also noted that actions against civil servants (and others, it may be added) in many cases are not based on material evidence of wrongdoing but on the exercise of (subjective) judgement, which may turn out to be flawed at some future date. Nor do the investigation officers of NAB possess sufficient experience, knowledge or expertise about the cases they are handling. Criminalisation of policy decisions, the secretaries argue, would lead civil servants to cautiousness and indecision, resulting in a further slowdown of government processes and projects, adding that there are clear signs this is happening already. NAB has unfortunately started questioning everyone involved in the decision-making process despite the age-old principle of decisions being taken in good faith based on the information available at the time. Ironically, whereas Section 36 of the NAO grants indemnity to actions taken by NAB in good faith, all actions by other government functionaries are very frequently put under scrutiny on the allegation of mala fide intent, even though Section 23A of the Civil Servants Act provides similar indemnity to the civil services too. As if all this were not enough, recently NAB has even taken to questioning decisions made by the cabinet and its committees. This indifference towards the legitimate executive authorities and subsequent actions against officers charged with implementing those decisions is bound to discourage innovation, ingenuity and creative thinking and instead promote a risk-averse approach among civil servants and senior government functionaries.
The civil service inherited from British colonialism and once described as the ‘steel frame of the Empire’ is today a pale shadow of its former self. Starting with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s emasculation of the independence of the bureaucracy through secure tenure, over the years the bureaucrats have felt compelled to align themselves with one or the other political party in power for their own survival. This has unfortunately weakened the integrity of the service perhaps beyond repair. Nevertheless, if the current dispensation (despite denials) views the bureaucracy as hopelessly beholden to its political opponents and has therefore abandoned it to the tender mercies of NAB, this could not but have produced anything else except the current paralysis in decision-making and governance. It is in the government’s own interest, as well as that of all the political forces, to if not repeal at least amend the NAO to winkle out its draconian provisions against the principles of justice and due process.

No comments:

Post a Comment