It is said that a blind man can be guided to get to his destination but a floundering person, a person who can see but will not, cannot be guided to the same given point because he does not want to get there.  It is no secret that everyone knows what has to be done to get the country back into the charmed diplomatic loop that will give us back our credibility and acceptability in the international arena to transform the country once again as a respected sovereign state.   But what prevents us from taking the right decisions is not a lack of ideas, there are plenty in the resource bank of the historical memory of this country; it is not the search for home grown ideas, most of the  answers to our various problems are in fact resolutions worked out within the resource base of the country; it is not that we really believe that our strategic significance or our development model is so phenomenal that the world particularly those in the developed countries are so envious of us that they want to destabilize us; it is not that anyone seriously believes that the international NGO community is in cohorts with the ‘enemy’ –that they are in alliance with some section of the international lobby determined to destabilize us or that they are making so much money that they disseminate negative facts injurious to the image of the country or that they are in toe with the tiger lobby and are determined to divide this country.  Besides this is it possible that the planetary configuration is as yet not favourable to the country which prevents policy makers from taking the vital decisions that have to be made by a responsible government elected to be accountable to the people for their action.

None of the above has any rational validity.  Why then are we stagnating without making significant movement forward, for instance in the obvious urgent areas designated by the Human Rights Commission in Geneva? If we are thinking of home grown efforts it should be the implementation of the LLRC recommendations, a commission set up by the government for the specific purpose of finding answers to our problems. It is time we put our preoccupation with the ‘international pressure’ and ‘wrestle’ with the job in hand.

The missing Link – The Independent Public Service.

 What is missing?  The missing link as addressed in this article is an efficient, competent and accountable non politicized public service cadre, which by its inherent characteristic of objectivity, be so placed as to advice the government and their immediate bosses in charge of the ministries, on shaping public policy and ensure clearly defined procedures for effective governance processes.  Public Service is the institution conceptualized to be the conduit through which government policy is executed for the service of the people.  The institutions that they create have their specific place for the explicit purpose of recognizing the needs of the people and finding ways and means of satisfying them.

Since the end of the war on the 9th of May 2009, there has been a surge in discussion groups and writings on how to proceed on the path towards peace and reconciliation, on building trust and confidence, on healing of wounds and on bridging the protocol deficiency in our external relations (of which at one time we excelled). Since the end of Prabhakaran, three years down the line, we should be beyond discussions and well into action; particularly in the area of power sharing and the resolution of the causes for the conflict and into channeling policy focused on the resuscitation of the human values of social justice embedded on the time honoured democratic principle of the centrality of the individual, his concerns and requirements.  An effective public service should have had their memos ready to present to the policy makers for advice and direction in policy; elected representatives do not always have access or knowledge of the ‘historical’  continuity that a public service official has (or had).  The lacuna in their service can be traced to the 1972 constitution which actively facilitated the politicization public servants by removing the public services commission and replacing it with the State Services Advisory Board and State Services Disciplinary Board under the direction of the Cabinet who ‘had the responsibility for the appointment, transfer, dismissal and disciplinary control of state officers’.  This move was made dependent on the philosophy of the government of the time- that sovereignty of the people was vested in the elected members of the legislature- which when translated meant the kowtowing of officials to the government of the moment. The public service officials were expected to be more sensitive to the politicians’ commands than that of the rules and regulations of the public service manual. The rationale behind these changes was that, the government needed a more pliant public service that will empathize with the changes in the politico-socio development programs which may not be forthcoming from the traditional, more conservative elitist cadres among the public servants.  The 1978 constitution although it did away with these boards retained the same functions as before for the Cabinet of Ministers.

By abolishing the public service commission, the system did away with the independence of the public servants.  When any cadre is dependent for their appointments, transfers and promotions as well as disciplinary control to the political leadership then the result is to have a malleable service that loses its accountability to the people and become more flexible to their political masters.  By limiting the space for the independence of the public servant the system robbed capable officers of their initiative and intelligent contributions.  When the public servants look for retirement benefits from their political superiors, the possibility of their career performance being influenced by their future expectations compromises the independence of the public official even more.

Ministers are not necessarily specialists while public servants especially the secretary cadres are chosen for their specialization and intellectual scholarship.  When political appointments invades this specialists terrain then the ability to provide independent viewpoints become supplanted with the obvious emergence of sycophancy where ‘yes’ to all issues is heard and rarely or never a ‘no’ to any suggestion by the political leadership. This has a two way effect in that the political leaders become accustomed to having everything they say affirmed and any contrary point of view is regarded as anti- establishment /antagonist position. The net result is that the service begin to be filled not with ‘servants of the public’ but with persons without accountability to the public drawing security of office merely by being subservient to the political leadership. A public service system that is based on a broad framework involving a ‘system of role relationships among four variables of citizenry, politicians, public policy and administrators’ come unhinged.  Processes develop where officials no longer consider the public as their reviewers of performance but are content as long as they are able to keep their political bosses think that they are doing exemplary work and that all what they are planning and doing are what the country requires.  Without exception politicians lead close circuit lives for ‘security reasons’ and remain unexposed to the changing moods of the public which does not get filtered to the politician by the public servant.  Staying in the safety net, these officers in strategic positions, play the irresponsible game of survival that inevitably wrecks the political image and prospects of the government and by that of the politicians as well. The image of the country too continues to be diminished.

Aung Sang Suu Kyi’s  Nobel Peace Prize Speech is a Universal Message

What Aung Suu Kyi said in her Nobel Peace prize acceptance speech, is what officials in this country should be telling their government- “wherever suffering is ignored, there will be the seeds of conflict, for suffering degrades, and embitters and enrages”. Continuing further she says if asked as to why she is fighting for freedom she would say, “It is because I believe that democratic institutions and practices are necessary for the guarantee of human rights”. This is a universal message, a message secretaries of ministries and public officers must be telling their government because people need to breathe freely and to do so democratic institutions and good governance practices have to be in place.  Those who can reach the policy makers must say what Suu Kyi told the world, “… As long as negative forces are getting the better of positive forces anywhere, we are all at risk……..it is also within human capability to work to reinforce the positive and to minimize or neutralize the negative……Even if we do not achieve perfect peace on earth because perfect peace is not of this earth, common endeavors to gain peace will unite individuals and nations in trust and friendship and help to make our human community safer and kinder”.   This in fact is the message that comes out clearly in the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission recommendations;  the home grown message the advisors to the government need to get across, is that this country does not need others to tell us to implement the LLRC recommendations.  Unfortunately, if the government, as has happened, has been tardy in its implementation because the public service advisors have not been able to proffer the right advice on time, it is no outrage if we are being somewhat pressurized to do so by the international community.  It is better to act at least now , hasten to do so and in good grace instead of making pretentious posturing to the domestic audience that we are holding out against the international community because we are an independent  sovereign country.  True we are a sovereign nation but in today’s globalized context no country is an island by itself. All countries are subject to the international code of conduct.  It is here that the public service officials, as independent and competent individuals, become relevant and strategically significant.  The country must hear this message clearly.  Nothing has been said on this matter as cogently as Aung Sang Suu Kyi has told the world.

The Present Must be a ‘Potential Period of Creativity.’

This is the moment that has to be captured for swift action to ward off all the ‘evil spirits’ that have pervaded this beautiful island.  It is only then that we can say along with the ILO director – General that after a prolonged period of uncertainty we find ourselves also in a “potential period of creativity”.  After years of conflict that has destroyed the momentum of development and progress, this hard won peace in our country must be utilized to rethink ‘our priorities,  linking policy agendas with basic standards of fairness …… and respond to people’s concerns’.  We can no longer sing the hosannas of the troubled past and expect to be a respected member of the international community.  To keep the bogey of the tiger alive will help no one. The caravan must move on.

It is to be hoped that a new rethink will bring about the delinking of the political establishment and the institutions and governance processes.  The distance is essential to create objectivity in the thinking process, to hear the voices of the ‘others’, to differentiate the sycophant from the genuine advisor and to move closer to the people for ‘rejuvenation’ , an exercise in politics.  To be able to see right from wrong, in fact to become clear headed is the call of the moment.