Independence for Foreign Service and Public Service through 19A
May 1, 2015
The administrative system, adopted and incorporated into Sri Lanka’s first Constitution after independence, suffered serious interference in 1972, when the Civil Service Commission was abolished and most of its functions were passed on to the cabinet of ministers.
The most importan
t of these functions were the appointment, promotion and disciplinary control of all public servants. The taking of these by the cabinet resulted in a discontinuity with the traditions of civil service introduced by Britain, in which the position of the permanent secretary as the chief accounting officer of a ministry was downgraded.
These permanent secretaries played a key role in shaping and directing their ministries. The direct cabinet interference into the workings of the civil service damaged its independence, and led to the politicisation of the public service.
While some of the powers of the Public Service Commission were somewhat restored in 1978, the position of permanent secretary was not restored. At the same time, the creation of the executive presidential system meant that the ministers came under the president’s control.
The deterioration process that began with the cabinet taking over the administrative functions got further amplified with the president becoming more or less responsible for appointing, promotions and also for the discipline of the Public Service.
The 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001 was an attempt to remove this interference through independent commissions that would oversee the appointments of public servants. Five of these commissions were appointed, and they were to ensure that the civil service had the necessary independence to function well, with no direct interference from the office of the president. That too was replaced by a new amendment.
Due to this politicisation, which began in 1977, our once competent Foreign and Public Services lost their edge and capability to perform. Therefore the enactment of 19A on Tuesday paves the way for setting up of an independent Public Service Commission, where the appointment, promotion and disciplinary control of all public servants will be managed through that commission. This will certainly minimise the political interference in the service in the future. But a lot remains to be done to bring our Public Service back to speed.
The most importan
t of these functions were the appointment, promotion and disciplinary control of all public servants. The taking of these by the cabinet resulted in a discontinuity with the traditions of civil service introduced by Britain, in which the position of the permanent secretary as the chief accounting officer of a ministry was downgraded.These permanent secretaries played a key role in shaping and directing their ministries. The direct cabinet interference into the workings of the civil service damaged its independence, and led to the politicisation of the public service.
While some of the powers of the Public Service Commission were somewhat restored in 1978, the position of permanent secretary was not restored. At the same time, the creation of the executive presidential system meant that the ministers came under the president’s control.
The deterioration process that began with the cabinet taking over the administrative functions got further amplified with the president becoming more or less responsible for appointing, promotions and also for the discipline of the Public Service.
The 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001 was an attempt to remove this interference through independent commissions that would oversee the appointments of public servants. Five of these commissions were appointed, and they were to ensure that the civil service had the necessary independence to function well, with no direct interference from the office of the president. That too was replaced by a new amendment.
Due to this politicisation, which began in 1977, our once competent Foreign and Public Services lost their edge and capability to perform. Therefore the enactment of 19A on Tuesday paves the way for setting up of an independent Public Service Commission, where the appointment, promotion and disciplinary control of all public servants will be managed through that commission. This will certainly minimise the political interference in the service in the future. But a lot remains to be done to bring our Public Service back to speed.
Public Service capacity
For example, over the years, the politicising of the Foreign Service and linking up internal politics with foreign policy curbed Sri Lanka’s negotiation capacity with its counterparts. Foreign policy is often the bridge between Sri Lanka and the world. To get the best result for our country in the future, the country requires sound diplomacy. To do that effectively we would require highly skilled diplomats.
While the Public Service badly needed the independence to function effectively they also need now to make that difficult transition from a predominantly narrow bureaucratic mindset toward a more broad-based governance approach to management; an important consideration would therefore be the quality of training and development provided to public managers.
The question is, how can/should public managers be trained to sort through these issues and become effective management practitioners? What conceptual frameworks, practical tools and skills, and professional abilities do they need to be able to lead and manage effectively to deliver value to the public?
The system of higher education— especially universities and School of Public Administration – that helps to build Public Service capacity by producing skilled professionals (engineers, doctors, IT specialists, architects, managers, lawyers, and professors), to name a few, needs to be reoriented and ramped up.
Although some progress has been made, several challenges remain, including the new role imposed on the service by societal changes, global and international environment, and the need to align public sector reforms with training and development for public administration. Therefore with the new empowerment we also need to build competence to ensure the public is better served by the Public Service.
For example, over the years, the politicising of the Foreign Service and linking up internal politics with foreign policy curbed Sri Lanka’s negotiation capacity with its counterparts. Foreign policy is often the bridge between Sri Lanka and the world. To get the best result for our country in the future, the country requires sound diplomacy. To do that effectively we would require highly skilled diplomats.
While the Public Service badly needed the independence to function effectively they also need now to make that difficult transition from a predominantly narrow bureaucratic mindset toward a more broad-based governance approach to management; an important consideration would therefore be the quality of training and development provided to public managers.
The question is, how can/should public managers be trained to sort through these issues and become effective management practitioners? What conceptual frameworks, practical tools and skills, and professional abilities do they need to be able to lead and manage effectively to deliver value to the public?
The system of higher education— especially universities and School of Public Administration – that helps to build Public Service capacity by producing skilled professionals (engineers, doctors, IT specialists, architects, managers, lawyers, and professors), to name a few, needs to be reoriented and ramped up.
Although some progress has been made, several challenges remain, including the new role imposed on the service by societal changes, global and international environment, and the need to align public sector reforms with training and development for public administration. Therefore with the new empowerment we also need to build competence to ensure the public is better served by the Public Service.
(The writer is a HR thought leader.)
