some thoughts for a beter nation

Speech delivered at IUB on 18/11/2009

GOOD GOVERNANCE AND POLITICIZATION OF BUREAUCRACY: NEED FOR A NEW APPROACH


Good governance is the most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development.” Kofi Annan [former Secretary General, UN]
Governance is a concept comprising complex mechanisms, processes, institutions and relationships through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their rights and mediate their differences. In most of the developing world, the debate about governance is taking place within the context of rapid urbanization combined with political and economic changes. The challenges of development is not only to improve the quality of life but also to achieve higher standards of health, nutrition, a cleaner environment, more equality of opportunity, greater individual freedom and a richer cultural life.
Many of the multilateral organizations including the United Nations and the World Bank have stressed the elements of good governance and their relation to development. In the Millennium Declaration, the world’s leaders stated that the development goals could only be achieved through good or democratic governance. They, furthermore pledged to spare no effort to promote democracy and strengthen the rule of law.
Democracy cannot function effectively in the absence of good governance. And both are complimentary to each other. However, representative democracy alone cannot guarantee good governance. It requires an efficient and non partisan administrative machinery to carry out the massive challenges of governance to achieve the objectives of transparency, accountability and participation. Surveying the experience of developing countries in the years since the end of colonialism, it is evident that administration has a pivotal role to play in socio-economic development. When we analyze the successful democracies and economic powers in the world we can see that all those countries have an efficient system of public administration run by career bureaucrats.
Singapore is an example. Although Singapore inherited the same British model of governance as other Commonwealth states, its governing system has become widely known for efficiency and competence, especially in terms of its role in generating an “economic miracle.” Between 1988 and 1997, its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased more than 2.5 times; between 1993 and 1997, it continued to rank very high in terms of its business-friendly environment; and by 1994, its per capita GDP ($20,000) surpassed that of Australia, Canada and the UK.Since independence, the government depended on the civil service to build a state and create the conditions which would maintain it in power. Notable feature of the government bureaucracy in Singapore has been the lack of corruption
Even though critics often repudiate the repressive and anti-human policies of Singapore Government and administration, one cannot deny the fact that Singapore has one of the most efficient and meritocratic administrative system based on service delivery and transparency.
In the case of the political systems which have experience the collapse of democracy and emergence of authoritarianism, one of the common denominator, always, was politicized and dysfunctional administration. We have several examples including our own country.
Unfortunately Bangladesh also had to witness a history of chaos, instability and economic backwardness like many other newly emerged nation states in Asia and Africa. Lack of a professional cadre of administrators without any commitment to democratic values and ethics, has seriously eroded the prospects of our country’s development-both economic and political. Hence, reform in civil service and good governance are urgent need for a more stable and prosperous Bangladesh. Unfortunately, there is hardly any meaningful effort towards this goal.
When we became independent in 1971, we inherited an exploited and war torn economy, under-developed infrastructure and several other social constraints. Naturally, the hopes and aspirations of the people looked forward for a stable and egalitarian welfare state based on the principles of equality, justice and efficiency. However, after independence our leaders were too busy in solving the urgent political expediencies related to power sharing, completely neglecting the need for laying the strong foundation of an apolitical and professional civil service based on merit. In contrast, Indian leaders gave priority to the administrative system and decided to follow the British Civil Service system which the country inherited as a colonial legacy. Inspite of India’s massive size and diversities, administrative structure is uniform with a certain degree of efficiency and accountability. Though there is change in governments, no attempt was made to change the pattern of recruitment or making bureaucracy subservient to political patronage. This efficient administrative system has helped the country to secure economic growth and development. On the contrary, lack of stable and effective administrative structure coupled with political unrest has seriously affected our country’s prospects. Even though large amount of public expenditure was incurred on development, the efforts were often ended up in mismanagement, corruption and authoritarianism.
When Banga Bandhu was not given the power to form the Government after the 1970 election victory in Pakistan, he announced a non cooperative movement and asked the Govt. officers, civil and military administration to lay down their work till the power was handed over in a democratic manner. Majority of the East Pakistani officers supported this movement. When Freedom movement began, this support from administration and military became widespread and bureaucrats and army officers joined hands with civilians to attain freedom. This was justifiable as the circumstances needed the support of entire people irrespective of civilians and bureaucrats. But after independence the new country should have checked politicization of army and bureaucracy as these would have lead to authoritarianism and corruption.
In India, leaders were able to curb the undue influence of Army and bureaucracy in politics. The Army, Navy and Air-force come under Defense Ministry and there are cabinet committees to oversee the functioning or Army. In short, there exist several checks and balances to avoid any of the defense forces to become powerful enough to overthrow civilian structure.
But our leaders failed to check the influence of army in politics and we had to face the drastic consequences.
Ever since independence, there was a deliberate attempt to politicize bureaucracy in Bangladesh by all political parties. Soon after independence, it was freedom fighters who received undue promotion and patronage through the side tracking of the others who did not get an opportunity as they were stuck in Pakistan and were later repatriated. Competence and efficiency was never taken into consideration and political affiliation and loyalty were the parameters for selection and promotion. Our political parties deliberately ignored the fact that a new born democracy need efficient and accountable administration rather than a group of servants .With every change of Government, all the good and lucrative postings were given to those who have been victimized for alleged inefficiency or incompetency by the previous government. Their plea was that the government considered them supporter of the party in opposition. As a result of this ongoing drama, we have now pro-Awami League, pro-BNP and pro-other party bureaucrats. We can hardly find out a pro-Bangladeshi bureaucrats sincerely committed to the aspirations of the people over and above his own party preferences and commitments to leaders in power. In this process development goals were often neglected and most of the time this career civil servants were busy in doing favors to political masters and their party members. This has led to widespread corruption and patronage politics.
Apart from that we have seen civil servants agitating on the streets for their demands in some case, demanding change of Government, which often disrupted the functioning of formal democracy in our country. The army taking over the reign of power through coups and counter coups. There were several mutinies in Air force, Navy, Ansar and civil service too and the latest was the mutiny in the BDR which has led to death of many officers and innocent people. On all these occasion we can see that our administration miserably failed to control the forces or civil servants. More over we couldn’t take necessary steps to avoid its future recurrence. Political parties always used Army and civil servants for their own selfish motives and vice versa. This unholy nexus or deal between politics/Army/ bureaucracy is the worst curse or our country.
However In spite of such bad governance, Bangladesh has survived as the people and the local Union Parishad have been the backbone of whatever progress we have made. For example during the 60s, our population was about 70 million and we were deficit in food by about 30%, now we have 160 million population with ten percent less cultivable land, due to urbanization and industrialization. Yet we are producing sufficient in fact a slight surplus sometimes. All we need to import some for buffer stock in case of natural calamity. If bureaucracy was not utilized ruthless for political purpose and corruption, Bangladesh could have gone far ahead in development and poverty alleviation.
Hence, the efforts towards good governance should start from reform in our civil service. We need a competent and efficient cadre of civil servants to address the challenges and opportunities of globalization and free market economy. For this purpose, recruitment of civil servants should be independent impartial and based on pure merit rather than political background. In India, the All India Service cadres are selected through a rigorous process of examinations and interview. There is no political interference in selection and training. Though we have a Public Service Commission (BPSC) established under the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh and works under the provisions of the Articles 137 to 141 of the Constitution of Bangladesh and certain other rules and regulations made by the Government; it remains highly politicized, divided and corrupted. There is no credibility for the test and interview and the examination process often lead to mal practices.
When we analyze our history, it is clear that bureaucrats played a vital role in supporting and sustaining autocratic regimes in our country as they enjoy enormous power under authoritarian system. Even our democratic leaders and parties tend to promote only ‘desirable officers’ who can refine the policies and programs as per the dictates of the party. Sadly, the hopes and aspirations of our civil society and our much needed developmental concerns have been sidelined and forgotten. But at least the ‘argumentative and agitating’ Bangladeshi society should realize the consequences of this politicization and should demand for an impartial, non-political and people centric administration which can perceive each Bangladeshi as a legitimate citizen and not as Pro- Awami League or pro-BNP citizen. For this we need a movement towards good governance and efficient administration.
When bureaucracy is independent and committed towards the goals of development administration with less or no interference from political masters, the machinery can function effectively. There will be consistency of polices as well. The reform must start from recruitment process itself. Motivated and highly educated young civil servants recruited on the basis of merit and promoted only on performance appraisal will indeed make substantial changes in our governance. This will certainly facilitate socio economic development and create free market in our country. Development cannot thrive where people cannot participate in governance, human rights are not respected, information does not flow, and civil society and the judiciary are weak.
Another important area of concern is to provide the best possible training and benefit packages to civil servants to make them perform better and reduce the scope for bad decision making and corruption. There must be effective rules and restraints to check public authority and corruption. Independence of judiciary and establishment of independent commission to check corruption are also important. Moreover decision making needs to be brought closer to the people so that they have more confidence in the state. All government programs will work better, if there is democracy and all stakeholders are consulted.
Low administrative ethics and corruption are no doubt a worldwide phenomenon. But its effects are most disastrous in developing countries like Bangladesh. The country’s policy makers must realize that its social and economic costs are virtually devastating.
Apart from that we should focus on another corner stone of real democracy- strengthening of local government institutions as these institutions can ensure better public service delivery and transparency. Though Bangladesh has a long history of local governments, the structure and content of local governments and its service delivery are far from satisfactory. Moreover, successive governments were not keen to strengthen local bodies to make administration more accountable and representative. Bureaucratic control over local government is visible in each decision making process which makes the rural representatives mere puppets of government or bureaucracy. The lowest operating elected level (the Union Parishad, or UP) has limited resources, little revenue raising authority, and is dominated by the District and Upazilla administration. They have, therefore, almost no influence on how the government uses its resources in their areas.
It is not exaggerating if one says that local bodies in Bangladesh often act like organizations of ruling party in power. There should be independent local government commission to control and monitor the local government
To overcome these defects, political will from the policymakers and role of civil society is required. Moreover the agenda of decentralization should go along with the efforts towards good governance. Decentralization is meaningful only when it is implemented along with other economic and political reform. In the absence of a responsive government and undivided community spirit, decentralization may lead to corruption, emergence of local elites and disparity.
Lord Acton once said that power corrupts and absolutes power corrupts absolutely. This is applicable in our country as well. So what we need urgently is to check any form of authoritarianism and misuse of power whether it is from political parties or civil servants or Army. When a new government was elected last year with thumbing majority we all expected that our country will herald a new era. But it is not happening as the problem lies in our structure and unless we sincerely address the deficiencies in our political system and initiate an institution building efforts, we can’t meet the demands of our next generation. They will inherit the same legacy full of frustrations, mutiny and bad governance.
Democratically elected government is not a magic lamp to solve the problems of instability and violence. The government must tolerate the opposition and make a consensus with them on all important issues. There should be freedom of press and expression and political control over national security forces. Moreover, there should be a disciplined law and order machinery to control and check any anarchic politics which often threatens the very survival of the political system. Thus the new strategies should deviate from the conventional methods and should focus on reshaping the entire socio-political structure of the country.