Let an Act of Parliament regulate promotions
ON September 7, the government promoted 494 officers of different cadres of Bangladesh Civil Service (BCS) to the posts of additional secretary, joint secretary, and deputy secretary in the Bangladesh Secretariat (hereinafter called the Secretariat), commonly known as seat of the government. Of the total, 60 joint secretaries, 163 deputy secretaries and 271 senior assistant secretaries have been promoted to the posts of additional secretary, joint secretary and deputy secretary respectively.
A number of allegations and criticisms have been levelled against these promotions, which have been termed by many as "mass promotions," "wholesale promotions," "unprecedented promotions" and "spate of promotions." It has been said that promotions have been given without the availability of required number of vacant posts, which is a breach of administrative and financial discipline. This allegation stands substantiated when The Daily Star of September 8 reported that with the promotions, the number of additional secretaries stood at 186 against a total of 108 posts while the number of joint secretaries reached 498 against 430 posts. The number of deputy secretaries was already more than the government had posts for, 1, 317 against 855. The number of deputy secretaries swelled with the promotion of another 271 senior assistant secretaries.
Second, some 526 officers in these three tiers have either been superseded or denied consideration. This has been done with the intention to facilitate promotion of officers loyal to the ruling Awami League (AL). It has been reported that out of 60 or so deputy commissioners appointed by the caretaker government, only one has been promoted as joint secretary.
Third, in the absence of required vacant posts, most of the promoted officers will remain attached to the establishment ministry as officers on special duty (OSDs) for a long time. This will result in huge financial and man-hour loss.
Fourth, the large number of promotions will not only cause financial loss but will also adversely affect discipline among the senior civil servants. There will be competition among the promoted officials to get better posts and they will end up getting involved in politics. This will lead to further politicisation of administration.
It may be recalled that till 1990, promotions to the posts of deputy secretary and above in the Secretariat were generally given on the basis of actual number of vacant posts. At the beginning of 1992, the BNP government promoted a lot of officials to the posts of deputy secretary, joint secretary, additional secretary and secretary. The promoted officials outnumbered the vacant posts. As a result, some of the promoted officials had to wait for months to be posted against vacant posts. This has been the practice with the successive party governments for political gains.
While defending the decision of promoting the officials, the establishment secretary said that those who deserved promotions had got promoted. It had also brought an end to deprivation. This explanation of the establishment secretary has given rise to further questions. In its editorial of September 9, The Daily Star wrote: "Most of the promoted officials are said to have been sidelined during past governments. It is stated that one of the criteria for their selection to higher posts has been how unblemished they have been by partisan bias. The question is hasn't the government been influenced by a slant of its own? The issue here is two-some: fair play and recognition of merit and ability. True, during the two terms served by the BNP since 1991 elections, promotions, postings and easing out as OSDs were largely governed by political considerations. The AL government undertook a reversal process. How long these changes and counter-changes in the administration will continue as the services of the Republic remain in a perpetual state of dis-equilibrium?"
In its editorial of September 10, another English language national daily (New Age ) wrote: "If previous experiences are any indicators, it means that the government, just like its predecessors, elected or unelected, has actually rewarded those who are loyal to the ruling quarters, proven or perceived. Simply put, the government is continuing with the sadly familiar tact of politicising the bureaucracy along partisan lines."
Article 133 of the Constitution provides that Parliament may by law regulate the appointment and conditions of service of persons in the service of the Republic, and the president may make rules to regulate the appointment and the conditions of service of such persons until provision in that behalf is made by or under any law.
The Services (Reorganisation and Conditions) Act, 1975, effective from July 1, 1973, empowered the government to reorganise services of the Republic and of public bodies and nationalised enterprises and prescribe grades and scale of pay of persons employed therein. The Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974 allows a public servant to opt to retire on completion of 25 years of service on the one hand, and empowers the government to retire a public servant on completion of 25 years of service without assigning any reason.
Both the above Acts are silent about the appointment of persons in the service of the Republic or of any statutory body. Mention may be made that appointment means direct appointment or appointment by promotion. In the absence of an Act of Parliament to regulate appointment, and more specifically promotion, to the above referred posts in the Secretariat, the successive party governments in the past 37 years or so have made, repealed or amended rules on political considerations.
Immediately after taking office on January 6, some AL high-ups reportedly told that the government would enact a law in the Parliament to regulate the promotion of officers in the Secretariat. But any move to this effect is yet to be seen. Enacting a law to regulate promotions to higher posts in the Secretariat will mean a check on the 'long arm' of the executive to manipulate promotions there.
In view of what has been stated above, there is an urgent need for an Act of Parliament to regulate the promotions to higher posts in the Secretariat. Rules may also be framed in line with the Act. This will help promote officials to higher posts in the Secretariat on the basis of their merit, efficiency and honesty and prevent politicisation of the administration to a large extent. This will also lead to fulfilment of a constitutional obligation.
M. Abdul Latif Mondal is a former Secretary to the government E-mail: latifm43@gmail.com
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments