By Ismail Khan
THE gradual breakdown of law and order in Swat in late 2008 and its total collapse in the early 2009 was until now considered to be the most damning charge against the civil and police bureaucracy of their failure to anticipate and arrest the fast declining security situation.
Since no lessons were learnt, it now appears that the unravelling of events, based on eyewitness accounts, that led to the
Bannu jailbreak in the early hours of April 15, 2012, has upstaged even the Swat paradigm.
In the aftermath of the Bannu jailbreak, some senior officers including the commissioner and DIG police along with the IG prisons Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were removed from their posts and asked to report to the Establishment Department. The last mentioned had taken over less than a month before the horrendous incident.
The malady afflicting the civil service in Pakistan is often traced to its having been politicised. This may not be a wholly correct diagnosis. An ailment essentially needs a correct diagnosis in order to be treated properly.
A proper analysis of the conduct of civil servants, and the quality of the services delivered by them over a period of time would suggest that the rot in the system could more appropriately be called a sort of degeneration set in motion by the wild ambitions and Machiavellian practices preferred by civil servants to the liking of their masters.
The relatively reclusive and taciturn civil officer of yore is dead and forgotten. This is the age of go-getters; of those who cannot wait for their time and turn. The most disrespectful moment in the history of the civil service came when newspapers started speculating about the expected transfers and postings of civil servants. That was followed by even more bizarre developments when some posts were referred to as more lucrative than others.
Civil servants, as the term suggests, are servants in the service of the public. Rationally, they could only be expected to aspire to the highest rung of their service career, whatever that might be.
In Pakistan in general and in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in particular, the situation is quite contrary to the established and perceived norms and practices.
In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, it is not uncommon to come across ridiculous situations where officers of various groups lay claim to which post or department should go to which group. What motives could be there behind such outlandish demands?
The officers of various groups use the platforms of their respective associations to air their grievances and demands. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, officers’ associations are literally being run on the lines of trade unions; in fact, some of the tactics applied by the former surpass even those resorted to by the latter.
This is disappointing, as a better performance would ideally have been expected from those serving in the province which is in the forefront of the war-like situation in the country. Unfortunately, the situation, as it is, can best be described as a free for all. Inappropriate demands bordering on those that don’t make sense are being made and pandered to.
In the context of the prevailing state of civil service in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, grades and ranks have become immaterial.
There are many examples where officers of junior grades are occupying posts for which they are otherwise not qualified.
The track record of some officers would indicate that these gentlemen have rarely, if ever, held a post proportionate to their grades. Some secretary-level officers complain in private that they feel embarrassed when they find themselves being equated with officials who until recently were serving as their section officers.
All posts of District Coordination Officers (DCOs) are invariably in basic scales of 20, save the one in Peshawar which is in 21. However, hardly if any of these 26 posts have been filled by officers of the requisite grade.
In one particular case, a DCO in a very important district bordering Afghanistan and the largest in size is occupied by an officer in BS-17, while the post of the DCO Peshawar is held by an officer in BS-18. Doesn’t this amount to having no trust in senior officers?
Similarly, there are tens of examples where an officer could be holding the charge of another post in addition to his own, which must invariably be very onerous and demanding full attention.
An officer could simultaneously look after the additional duties of fields as varied as industry or agriculture or in a more absurd scenario of health and minerals.
In many cases, an officer could be a commissioner and secretary of two or three different departments in one year.
Although examples of such rare genius cannot be found anywhere else, yet the country is in a state that is far from desirable.
In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, a uniform service structure in the shape of the Provincial Management Service (PMS) has been introduced by the previous government thus dealing a lethal blow to professionalism.
In the new scheme of things, an officer serving as section officer could suddenly be recalled to go and serve in the field as magistrate. That at least would be a lesser evil; the most bedevilling scenario being the one in which PMS officers keep dictating their own choice in the face of temptation.
There appears to be no silver lining as the status quo seems to be to the liking of one and all. Mediocrity, the sum total of our civil service, will forever rule this country, and remain unchallenged.
The writer is editor, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
http://dawn.com/2012/05/18/conduct-of-civil-servants/