10
IT is mind-boggling to find a leadership that so despises involvement of military bureaucracy in the affairs of democratically elected government, but at the same time is so predisposed to keep civilian bureaucracy at the helm of affairs even at the cost of the people’s elected representatives.
Local body elections are under way across the country and the PML-N government has once again made sure to run the government through bureaucrats rather than politicians (read, elected representatives of the people). Perhaps the latter could not be trusted whereas the civil servant still remains the most obedient servant of powerful politicians.
The local government law of all provincial governments is similar in its provision for a Local Government Commission (LGC) to supervise the working of local bodies. The commission shall consist of:
Is it justified to put a publicly elected government under a civil servant?
(a) Minister for local government, elections and rural development department, who shall be the chairman of the LGC; (b) Two members of the provincial assembly, one each nominated by the chief minister and leader of the opposition in the provincial assembly; (c) Two eminently qualified and experienced technocrats including a woman; (d) Secretary to government, law, parliamentary affairs and human rights department; and (e) Secretary to government, local government, elections and rural development department.
Besides many powers, the said commission would be able to recommend to the government even the suspension of a mayor or a chairman for fair conduct of inquiry. It seems reasonable to have elected representatives of the people at the helm of affairs with bureaucracy providing the support system. The case for Punjab is the same except for the fact that instead of two, three members of the provincial assembly would be appointed on the commission, the additional one being another nomination by the leader of the house.
As they say, the devil is in the details. All provinces except Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provide for a chief officer who would be a civil servant and oversee the activities of the local bodies. The chief officer shall be responsible for ensuring adherence by the local government to all laws, policies and oversight framework of the government in the prescribed manner.
The chief officer will also be able to refer cases to the LGC for inquiry, which again gives enough leverage to an individual civil servant to control elected representatives. It is a workable system but by no means is it devolution of power to elected representatives. Is it really justified to put a publicly elected government under a civil servant?
At the federal level the government has gone a step further and provided for the appointment of a retired civil servant as the chairman of the LGC. The complete composition of the commission for the federal capital is as follows: (a) A chairman, who shall be a retired civil servant or an eminent citizen of integrity and good track record, to be appointed by the government; (b) Two members of the National Assembly, one each nominated by the leader of the house and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly; (c) Two eminent, qualified and experienced technocrat members nominated by the government, including at least one woman; (d) Representative of the chief commissioner, Islamabad Capital Territory office, not below the rank of BS-19; and (e) Director, development & finance, ICT.
One wonders how the government plans to preclude the chance of civil servants forming a lobby against the elected representatives and protecting their own interests even at the cost of people’s aspirations which might be put forth by the elected representatives.
The ruling parties, particularly in Sindh and Punjab, do not seem to be comfortable with the idea of delegating power at the grass-roots level because it is very difficult to control individuals at this level, many of whom can grow in stature if given the opportunity. There would be a chance of these individuals growing bigger than the party itself and being able to have influence as independent candidates which can be handy in general elections as well. Zulfiqar Mirza already poses such a threat to the PPP in Badin, Sindh.
Such influence is not particularly liked by those who desire autocratic rule: they need individuals who can win by piggybacking on a party ticket rather than by exercising individual influence. No matter how many cycles of this sort of democracy are completed, it would remain an oligarchy in essence.
Lastly, if politicians are so averse to military rule — essentially rule by individuals who are not elected representatives — then they should also be averse to rule by civil servants because they fall in the same category. This shows that the problem the majority of politicians have with military rule is not its undemocratic overtones but the fact that military bureaucracy does not bow to them the way civilian bureaucracy does.
The writer is a former civil servant.
Published in Dawn, December 3rd, 2015
