Political appointments

We believe that allowing for more political appointees without legislative oversight may be a recipe for disaster.

In the world of public management, there is a debate between advocates of a permanent civil service and those who believe in a more transient, politically appointed, but technically more competent set of administrators at the helm of affairs in government. By deciding to lower the requirements for the top-level positions in the Planning Commission, the government appears to be coming down on the side of the latter. We do not disagree with its right to do so, nor even with the wisdom of the choice. But we do believe that allowing for more political appointees without legislative oversight may be a recipe for disaster. There have been many who have voiced opposition to the easing of the hiring criteria for positions at the Planning Commission, but given the fact that most of the critics are current or former members of the civil service, who will likely see their own power reduced by such a move, we do not give much credence to such concerns.

Pakistan’s government is currently dominated by the Civil Service of Pakistan, modelled as it is after the British civil service. Political appointees, by contrast, run affairs in many countries, most notably the US, but also places like Brazil, Germany, and others. Given Planning Minister Ahsan Iqbal’s Wharton education, it is perhaps unsurprising that he wants to experiment with a more American style of management within his ministry. But we would remind the minister that while the American system gives the executive the discretion to make appointments from outside a permanent civil service, it also gives the legislature oversight over whom the executive appoints to senior positions. While it may be too early to have such a system introduced in Pakistan, some oversight over who gets appointed to top government positions may be warranted, especially given the highly litigious nature of bureaucrats who get passed over for coveted appointments. It would save the government from dealing with myriad cases on a regular basis that challenge its personnel decisions, and it would save the taxpayers some money as well.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 27^th, 2013.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.