Pakistan and the bureaucracy

As the political instability deepens in Pakistan, the focus of attention has shifted from political performance to bureaucratic performance. The focus admittedly is not greatly off the mark as bureaucratic part of the state does constitute the permanent structure of governance and works in tandem with political apparatus.

Every political government is ultimately dependent on the administrative machinery of the state and apparently there is no alternative available for governance. Keeping in view the indispensability of the administrative machinery run by civil servants almost every government, civil and military, has tried to reform it with not very satisfactory results. It is generally held that the quality of government functionaries has gone down considerably and that the top echelons of civil bureaucracy are composed of mediocres who pander to political leadership to further their careers.

The assessment may not be out of place when the falling standards of governmental performance are taken into consideration.

It is often observed that the deterioration in standard of performance of bureaucracy is due to the policies of political establishment to keep a weak yet politicised civil service as past experience has taught them that managing affairs with powerful bureaucrats usually gives rise to intense factional competition they face from the bureaucracy itself. Powerful segments of civil service were given to arbitrary performance in the past and no political government wants the repeat of such dominance.

The issue has become crucial as it is not lost on the discerning eye that Pakistani state suffers from chronic institutional decline that is fast hurtling towards a major breakdown. The intense institutional degeneration is acutely hampering sustainability and growth of the state despite democratic political leadership now presiding over it. The institutional decline has reached the point where doubts are expressed about the coherence of the Pakistani state and its ability to regenerate itself. Unfortunately the realization of the malady is confined only to verbal references towards it whereas substantial practical measures to address it are sadly missing.

The decline that began almost three decades ago has reached an extent that rise to high level of offices of the state, whether in regular government cadres or allied public bodies, has become a poisoned chalice as almost all personnel holding these offices are shunted out of their positions ignominiously.

The bureaucratic decline has gone steep to the level that any governmental appointment is looked with skepticism indicating the public dissatisfaction with it.

The consistent duality of political system the country suffered from 1958 has caused a wide breach of confidence in the service cadres recruited by the state to discharge its functions. The credibility of governance structure is severely tested when the military usurps power and institutes administrative practices according to its narrow perceptions of statecraft.

The lopsided thought process of all military juntas displayed unfortunate tendency to take liberties with the administrative procedures distorting its very features. The result is that the country is managed through a completely out of tune administrative philosophy that suits neither the state nor the society.

The administrative hotchpotch the state public services have to endure has downgraded the civil service to a state that, in the words of a famous politician, it has remained neither civil nor service.

The government functionaries are trend setters in an inward-looking society and their lifestyle spiritedly emulated. In Pakistan the overwhelming influence of government machinery has resulted in creating a stultified society where everyone wants to become a government servant including professionals like doctors, engineers, accountants and business managers. And subjected to scant accountability and exposed to tremendous pelf no wonder what this bunch of self serving individuals, devoid of any collective social responsibility, has become; a self-regulating government cadre whose hallmark, irrespective of their station, is nothing but highhandedness.

The institutional decline of official bodies does not necessarily occur due to them being subjected to political power play within their ranks as political maneuvering is a sine quo non of hierarchical institutional behaviour but the usage of opportunist junior cadres for carrying out senior level functions considering that they will not demur to do anything wrecks not only the hierarchical ladder but also closes doors of rational and well-meaning dissent.

The negativity of proverbial political angle comes into play when junior cadres are used to perform political tasks ignoring regular party political cadres. Such policy cannot be justified on the pretext of pragmatism even if civil service cadres assure their political loyalty.

It is imperative to arrest the downward slide of institutional performance of employees of public sector and services. To begin with it is not very difficult to evaluate moral and financial conduct of public servants through myriad investigative agencies and weed out undesirable elements.

A public servants’ conduct may be the only benchmark of his service tenure. To revive credibility of state institutions, restitution of original public service principles is required in order to cleanse its perceptive foundation.

Tough monitoring of office dealings of public servants should become the order of the day and may be undertaken across the board. Seniority coupled with performance may be rewarded only and due attention may be paid to the advice rendered by public servants while ensuring that the final decision rests with public representatives.

In addition, the political forces may stop considering civil service as an alternative government or concurrent authority. It should be taken as a subordinate mechanism bearing no fixed loyalty, lacking political sagacity and having no political role to play. It would very well serve the political class to avoid sharing political perceptions of civil service as they lack the width of political vision.

Civil servants may not be co-opted to undertake political chores even if they assure their cooperation because politics, in ultimate analysis, is the wise exercise, distribution and maintenance of power which the civil service, owing to its natural disposition, can neither understand nor practice in its true spirit.

The administrative structure has been subjected to reforms process many times but the inertia of inaction and time horizons had dampened politicians’ appetites who preferred prevalence of status quo.

Such reform processes in the past had managed to touch the hornet’s nest and created dissatisfaction in the civil service that further downgraded its performance. While embarking upon civil service reforms it may be kept in mind that it is a transformational process and should not be treated as just a transactional exercise.

The broken-down and dysfunctional administrative structure requires careful handling. The most imperative issue is handling public financial management, a contentious and profoundly complicated phenomenon. Added to these important subjects is the personal conduct of the civil servants that frequently smacks of the negation of rules and procedures by them giving rise to arbitrariness, delay and confusion.

Keeping in view the significance of the subject it would be proper to straighten the change of command in reforms area and to streamline the procedural roles that need to be performed. Moreover the vastness of the task necessitates that it is divided it into two parts; the first dealing with quick fixes and the second pertaining to deeper structural reforms.

To begin with the appointment process has the potential to be streamlined quickly through internally advertising all key positions that will result in transparent appointments instead of the current procedure adopted by the adviser on establishment of filling the government machinery according to his choice and preference.