Giving promotions and prized postings

Officers belonging to the 1973 batch of freedom fighters received patronage of the AL government that recruited them as well as of the immediate past AL government. Many officers of this batch were promoted to the post of joint secretary during the immediate past AL government and given prized postings. Some of them were very close to the policy makers of the AL government and exercised great influence on them. The bureaucrats recruited during the regime of President Ziaur Rahman have received patronage of the past and present BNP governments. During the last thirty two months plus rule of the present BNP government, most of the officers of these two batches have been rewarded with accelerated promotions and prized postings. Many analysts have, therefore, opined that all the governments of independent Bangladesh recruited civil servants, but preferred their particular batches recruited during their period in the office. This has caused tremendous harm to the bureaucracy and divided them into separate camps. It may be mentioned that during the last three decades or so, the criteria for promotion to the posts of deputy secretary and above in the Bangladesh Secretariat, which is commonly known as 'the seat of the government,'were changed several times by the successive governments allegedly on political considerations i. e. to promote the bureaucrats loyal to the ruling government(s).

Filling up key posts in the field administration

Political party or parties in power attach great importance to field administration. The most loyal and trusted officers are posted as DCs, SPs, and UNOs (sub-district executive officers) so that they may be used for granting bail to the criminals and activists of the party or parties in power, putting opposition leaders and activists behind bars, manipulating results of elections as returning officers, and for many other purposes. They hold these prestigious posts in the field administration as long as they enjoy confidence of their political masters.

Contractual appointments

The successive governments have given contractual appointments to retired bureaucrats. Since the appointment of a contractual appointee can be terminated by serving one month's notice, he or she cannot discharge his or her assigned duties and responsibilities with courage and impartiality. He or she becomes partisan and exists only to carry out the orders of the political masters.

Punitive action against bureaucrats on political consideration

During the last three decades or so, the successive governments have sent hundreds of bureaucrats on forced retirement on completion of their 25 years of service, allegedly on political considerations, without giving them an opportunity for self-defence.

Besides, posting as officer on special duty (OSD) mostly on political considerations has become a norm in the administration since the early nineties. According to a report published in the Daily Ittefaq of June 10, 2004, at present 2500 officers holding the ranks of additional secretary, joint secretary, deputy secretary, and senior assistant secretary or assistant secretary are languishing as OSDs in the Establishment Division of the government. This is a huge wastage of trained manpower and public money.

Political appointments to important establishments including PSC

As a constitutional body, the Public Service Commission (PSC) is responsible for conducting tests and examinations for the selection of suitable persons for appointment to the service of the Republic [art. 140(I) (a)]. So its neutrality has to be beyond any question. One analyst writes: "The successive elected governments, though dependent upon the civil bureaucracy for routine administration or development work, resorted to political appointments in many important establishments including the Public Service Commission."

Controlling local governments through bureaucrats

If we have a cursory look at the history of local governments of Bangladesh we will find that the central government has mostly been apathetic to the elected bodies of local governments and favoured bureaucrats in their relationship with the local elected representatives. The central government has never been willing to give up its powers primarily on political considerations and has used or has been using the locally posted bureaucrats to retain control of these bodies. This leads these officers to become partisan.

Improper allocation of funds for development projects

The government undertakes development projects through the annual development programme (ADP) mechanism. Since independence, many development projects have been included in ADP not on national priority considerations but on political and other considerations. This process is still on and we hear from the finance minister that "populist or vote- oriented projects are getting priority over schemes, which are really important for the economic development of the country." The recent press reports about inclusion of 103 unapproved projects in the ADP for 2004-2005 under pressure from lobbyists, and ultimately retaining half of these unapproved projects in a list of extra programme for implementation in future with the approval of the competent authority in future, bear testimony to this.

We have no alternative to a professional, efficient, and neutral civil service. But how can it be ensured? Article 133 of our Constitution provides that parliament may by law regulate the appointment and conditions of service of persons in the service of the republic and until parliament makes such laws, the president may make rules to regulate the appointment and the conditions of service of such persons. The Services (Reorganisation and Conditions) Act, 1975, effective from 1 July, 1973, empowered the government to reorganise the services, and prescribe grades and scales of pay and other terms and conditions of services for persons in the service of the republic or of any public body. In exercise of this power, the executive organ of the state consisting of the president, the prime minister and the cabinet has been making rules to regulate appointment, promotion, disciplinary action, etc. of persons in the service of the republic or of any public body. But experiences of the last thirty years or so have amply proved that successive governments have made, repealed or amended these rules on political considerations. Similarly, the Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974, empowering the government to retire a public servant on the completion of his 25 years of service has been grossly misused by the successive governments on political considerations. These have been discussed briefly in the previous paragraphs and therefore need no repetition. It is felt that time has come when the legislature may revisit the aforesaid two Acts to enable it to exercise some sort of control to prevent politicisation of civil administration by the successive governments.

Speakers including advisers to the last care-taker government, law makers, senior politicians, former secretaries and ambassadors at a roundtable discourse held in Dhaka a few months back expressed opinion that the elected governments are masters but they must spell out what they expect from the civil servants. Political masters will formulate policy and the civil servants will implement it. Clear distinction needs to be maintained between the two roles.

M. Abdul Latif Mondal is a former Secretary, Government of Bangladesh.