CSS Forums - View Single Post - DMG

Omer · #1 Wednesday, February 17, 2010

The first critique is that this group was formed by the colonial masters. True, it may have been, but the fact is that the group has undergone so many changes over the past couple of decades that it has become public-friendly and is imbued with the spirit of public service.

If we start destroying service groups on the ground that they were formed by the colonial masters, then we have to abolish the police, the army, the audit and account service, the postal services, the railways and the Intelligence Bureau among many others, because all these were established by the British Indian government.

The second critique is that this group has dragged Pakistan into crises, which is rather amusing, for blaming others for our failures is one of our main national characteristics. The politicians are blaming the army, the army the politicians and the judiciary, and the intelligentsia is blaming all of the above. So the DMG is no exception in this regard.

The third critique is that it is a general group and gets the best of postings. It is true that it is a general group but I would add that this is the most well-trained and competent group among the civil services. With the exception of the years following the devolution plan, this group remained the top preference of all the top position holders.
Secondly, they acquire wide experience of every department of the government from land revenue to law and order and foreign commerce throughout their posting in the tehsils, districts, provincial governments and federal government. Perhaps due to this reason, this group is given preference over the other groups which are groomed in a single area.

A fourth critique is that they win over all the CMs and the prime minister very easily. This is not true as the DMG officers are public representatives, they have all rights to determine the national policies and priorities and the task of the bureaucracy is only to implement their policies. Due to this conviction, they always work with full devotion and consequently enter into the good books of CMs who are the best judges of performance evaluation.

The last critique is that the DMG is averse to the locally-elected nazims. This again is a baseless allegation and is an attempt to muster up sympathies for such nazims. The DMG has great respect for people’s representatives. Their only point of difference with the nazims is that they must not be blackmailed through their ACRs towards administrative dysfunctionality because the high-ups call into account not the nazim but the DCO.