Dr. Forqan Uddin Ahmed :
As political leadership has deteriorated, the bureaucrats are taking advantage of it. During the crisis period due to the corona pandemic situation the over emphasis of the bureaucrats has had a negative impact on the mindset of the politician and local representatives. From ministry to field and downwards the monopoly influence of the bureaucrats have made a frustrating situation over ministers, Parliament members and local representatives. The bureaucrats join the political programmes in a very formal way. With this process, the politicians are being overlooked and dishonored. They feel helpless and people’s participation is being hampered. A partisan sentiment prevails there. As a result they even protest the very executive post of all municipal councils. Under this circumstance, a very unhealthy relation is created and finally that leads to an issue of polarization. Who is responsible for this? Is it a failure of the bureaucrats or the politicians or both?
Bureaucracy is structurally and undemocratic and it has the tendency to undermine the power and status of the elected representatives. Bureaucracy often reasserts itself to be a repository of power without accountability. They tend to become part of the elite with vested interest in the maintenance of status quo. This rule of bureaucracy, coupled with its vested interest of not shedding its old control over power, inhibits the reform process in Bangladesh.
It may be popular to blame bureaucrats. The truth is that a country needs an efficient bureaucracy to run the affairs of the government and serve the public. Politicians should formulate policies. Professors should teach. Civil servants should govern. That is how it should be in a democracy. In India, the military has never been able to take over civilian governments. Have you ever thought why this is so? It is said that the Indian Administrative Service is the steel frame of Indian democracy.
The desired points of intervention have been noted here in regards to the mindset or attitudinal change of the bureaucrats. To overcome the problems, the bureaucrats might be the true leaders. They need to be moulded as follows. Firstly, the values, attitudes, perceptions of the bureaucrats could be refined through different process motivation to meet the challenging process of reforms in Bangladesh. The bureaucrats should be sensitive to the hopes and aspiration of the common mass of the country. Secondly, in order to groom them as transformational leaders as an exhaustive training package combining both indoor a field exercise could be developed a conducted rigorously. Thirdly, better incentives are to be provided in the form of pay and perks to attract better quality university graduates for the civil service of Bangladesh like that of private sector. Fourthly, the skills and techniques of a modern day manager may be acquired by the bureaucrats of Bangladesh. Fifthly, there is a general degeneration of values in Bangladesh society that seeming compass encompasses the bureaucracy also. Sixthly, the system of some kind of management by objectives be introduced the working procedures of the bureaucrats. Seventhly, training curricula should reflect the necessity of reform process of Bangladesh; they may be reminding that the reform process is a greater necessity than their entrenched corporate interest. However, the corporate interest could also not be lost sight of.
Bangladesh’s potentials are well recognised but due to its management deficiency or lack of its civil bureaucracy, Bangladesh’s potentials could not be fully realised. Its civil society, however, is emerging although still not a sufficient pressure group to bring about the changes / reforms like separation of judiciary from the executive and the decentralisation and institutionalisation of local bodies as stipulated in its well articulated Constitution. However, civil society can definitely play a catalyst role in bringing about the reforms. Along with it a thorough revamping and reorientation of Bangladesh’s bureaucracy is a necessity for the reforms as mentioned although it is likely its entrenched interests may still work as a resistance force. However, given proper motivation, this could be greatly overcome.
The external checks that are in vogue in Bangladesh are the question and answer and committee system of the Parliament, which may not be that effective in Bangladesh. Judiciary and press are the other two institutions for external checks of the bureaucracy. However, the establishment of anti corruption commission and ombudsman, are found effective and truly independent, could ensure better accountability of Bangladesh bureaucracy.
So it is necessary to establish the culture of mutual co-operation and understanding by avoiding the partisanship and polarisation between the politicians and bureaucrats. Only then the development will flourish by taking challenges. The development concept must be considered very honestly and religiously. There is no alternative of it. If there is a deviation, nation will suffer. We are to maintain the norms and generally accepted ethics of living in the society. Otherwise, it would be foolish or unwise. Finally, we would like to invite all concerned to be a patriot and live together with harmony for getting egos and difference of opinion. Only nation’s interest should be emphasised first. Nation waits for a collective realisation of all the bureaucrats and the politicians.
(Dr. Forqan is former Deputy Director General, Bangladesh Ansar & VDP).
