INTRODUCTION
The phrase
“administrative reform” has been widely used with at least two broad meanings.
In one regard it has been synonymous with administrative change, describing the
variety of important revisions of administrative practice and organization that
all administrative entities engage in from time to time. Defined in this way it
has no necessary time, directional or content bias. John Montgomery has adopted
such a definition and described it’ as follows:
Administrative
reform is a political process designed to adjust the relationships
between a bureaucracy and other elements in a society, or within the
bureaucracy itself.[1]
A FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING CIVIL SERVICE
SYSTEMS
The role of the civil service in economic development, governance, and public service is vital irrespective of the institutional and structural differences across countries.
My part of assignment will look at The structural and procedural innovations made under Administrative Reorganization Committee. The first part of the assignment discusses the need for civil service reforms and why it is such a ubiquitous phenomenon. The second part briefly discusses civil service reforms and a brief history of civil service reforms in Pakistan. The third part discusses the issue of civil service and governance and presents a framework for studying civil service systems.
The role of the civil service in economic development, governance, and public service is vital irrespective of the institutional and structural differences across countries.
My part of assignment will look at The structural and procedural innovations made under Administrative Reorganization Committee. The first part of the assignment discusses the need for civil service reforms and why it is such a ubiquitous phenomenon. The second part briefly discusses civil service reforms and a brief history of civil service reforms in Pakistan. The third part discusses the issue of civil service and governance and presents a framework for studying civil service systems.
While a great deal of
literature exists regarding the pros and cons of civil service systems, very
few have attempted to explain civil service systems in a theoretical framework.
Such a theoretical framework is very helpful in understanding and identifying
what characterizes a civil service system. It also facilitates comparative
analysis of civil service systems and helps in the evaluation and adoption of
innovative policies from other countries in a local perspective. Such
comparisons allow us to identify training needs and required skills for an
efficient and successful elite civil service.
Morgan has come up with a useful framework to
capture the varieties in various civil service systems. The framework uses two
characteristics of any civil service system.
(l) its professionalism
versus its politicization, and (2) its emphasis on process versus on outcomes
or results.[2]
There are very few countries of the world that are satisfied with their public bureaucracies and civil service systems.
There are very few countries of the world that are satisfied with their public bureaucracies and civil service systems.
There are some that are trying
to develop a career civil service and others that are fixing the problems of
having a career civil service.
There are some that are dealing
with legacies of past colonial civil service systems while others that are
struggling with identifying the role of civil service in a changing political
environment.
Whatever the case may be, civil
service reforms are a topic of interest around the world. Each nation of the
world is faced with the challenge of adjusting its domestic and international
policies rather rapidly in response to forces of globalization and
technological change .Below Figure 1 is showing military nexus in civil society
of Pakistan.
(Figure1)
SET UP AND PURPOSE OF ADMINISTRATIVE REORGANIZATION COMMITTEE
In December, 1958, the government set up an Administrative Reorganization
Committee with the following terms of reference in order to review the
organizational structure, functions and procedures of the Ministries
departments and Subordinate Offices of the Government of Pakistan, and to
recommend improvement for efficiency and expeditious disposal of business in
consonance with requirements of economy. To carry out a survey of the staff position
of the Central Government with a view to strengthening, retrenching or
re-allocating the staff wherever necessary. To recommend measures for the
establishment of close liaison between the Central and Provincial Government
administrations, particularly in the field of development work. To examine and
co-ordinate the recommendations of the Committee to be set up by the Provincial
Governments with a view to ensuring uniform approach to the problem of
organization of the Government Offices. The work of the Administrative
Reorganization Committee was carried on during the entire period of the
revolutionary government through the activities of its successor the Standing
Organization Committee.
REFORMS BY
ADMINISTRATIVE REORGANISATION COMMITTEE:
The Administrative Reorganization
Committee highlighted four major reforms in its initial report: A number of
structural and procedural changes proposed b y the Committee, and accepted by
the Government, were unprecedented in the administrative history o f the country.
New ground was broken by the Committee in respect of the following
matters: A sweeping reform was the introduction of the Section Officer system
in the Secretariat replacing several layers of subordinate staff which is known
in terms of the Lower Division Clerk, the Assistant, the Superintendent, the
Assistant Secretary and the Under Secretary, by a single officer of Under
Secretary's status assisted by a Steno typist and an Assistant.
Radical changes were made in the
system of financial control, budgeting and accounting. Administrative
Ministries were entrusted with wide financial powers; the dilatory system of
multiple clearances prescribed for incurring expenditure against
appropriate funds was abolished ;and a
system of financial advice was built into the Ministries to ensure efficient management of funds; The
scope of the Finance and Commerce Pool (constitute but not fully developed in
pre-Partition India) was widened through the creation of an Economic Pool
intended to include officers selected to serve the ministry of Industries as
well.
The scope of the responsibilities
of officers of the Foreign Service of Pakistan was substantially enlarged as a
result of the recommendation that commercial and public relations functions
performed abroad by representatives of the Ministries of Commerce and
Information respectively, should be taken over by officers of the Foreign
Service and form a normal part of their function.[3]
From 1958 to 1969, the military regime under General Ayub Khan took
measures to reign in the powers of the CSP, but overall there was a close
symbiotic relationship between the military and the civilian bureaucracy. The
civil bureaucracy did not usurp power but filled the power vacuum which was
created by the turbulence of the parliamentary period and adjusted to the
"realities" of the military regimes of the 1958 to 1971 period.
During the 1948 to 1958 period the CSP, having certain top insured that
government operations level positions reserved for its officers, at the central
and provincial levels would have a generalist "input" and a measure
of CSP control in implementation. During the Ayub period, the Establishment
Division (a CSP-dominated personnel operation with responsibilities in the area
of training) was able to secure advanced training overseas for CSP officers
that CSP domination of the bureaucracy was insured so not only by inscriptive criteria
but also by possession of superior knowledge and skills. In addition, the Ayub
period introduced two modifications in government management-the establishment of
the Economic Pool and “government public corporations." Both the
Pool and the new government by Certain
corporations were to become dominated by CSP off guarantees which insured CSP privileges
were continued by the constitutional Ayub regime but these, According
to Burki, were not critical for the maintenance of bureaucratic control over
policy making or government administration. Hence, for the first25 years of
Pakistan, the civil bureaucracy and the processes. The CSP were critical to the
decision making and implementation "steel frame" of government
Pakistan contributed to both the successes in period. As the most organized
public institutions and failures of the pre-Bhutto , the civil bureaucracy took
advantage of the disorganization which existed among the politicians.[4]
CIVIL
SERVICE REFORMS IN PAKISTAN
Administrative or civil service reform is not a new concept in the history of Pakistan. Even as a young nation, it was very much on the agenda of the government describes three efforts conducted between 1948 and 1958 to reform and reorganize the administrative structure in Pakistan. One of these was the First Pakistan Pay and Services Commission in 1948, another study by Rowland Egger in 1953 and finally a study by Bernard Galdieux in 1955.[5]
Administrative or civil service reform is not a new concept in the history of Pakistan. Even as a young nation, it was very much on the agenda of the government describes three efforts conducted between 1948 and 1958 to reform and reorganize the administrative structure in Pakistan. One of these was the First Pakistan Pay and Services Commission in 1948, another study by Rowland Egger in 1953 and finally a study by Bernard Galdieux in 1955.[5]
The latter two studies were commissioned by the
Pakistan Planning Board points to the fact that most of these reforms were
accompanied by large scale purges in the civil service, thus shaking the
confidence of civil servants and leading to increased politicization of the
services. It is worth clarifying that in most cases these reforms were focused
on significant changes in the higher civil services with some cosmetic changes
in the nomenclature and pay scales of lower strata of the civil services.
A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSING THE BUREAUCRATIC
STRUCTURES
AND DEVELOPMENT.
In order to
understand how bureaucratic structures impact development the relationship
between politicians, bureaucrats and the public needs to be analyzed in
specific historic contexts. A number of conditions of success can be identified
by drawing on analytical models that schematically describe the relationship
between the three protagonists.
The military regime under General Ayub Khan
provided a challenge and an opportunity to the CSP. The challenge was that
initially the military held the CSP as partly responsible for creating
political chaos in the country: Therefore they applied pressure on the CSP
cadre to mend its ways. In the first instance the military appointed about 272
armed forces officers to important administrative positions in the civil
service. In the early 1959, it charged that 13 CSP officers had indulged in “corruption,
misconduct, and inefficiency”. After a summary trial the regime forcibly retired
the officers. This shook the confidence of the CSP cadre.[6].
The military
regime demonstrated that it meant business and would purge the CSP, if they did
not mend their ways. And in August 1959,
the regime appointed a Pay and Service Commission, which was headed by A. R.
Cornellius, the Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Pakistan, who was known for
his anti-CSP views. By such measures the regime conveyed the impression that it
aimed to reorganize and restructure the services which implied eroding the power
and privileges of the CSP. The CSP were able to resist the challenge that the
military regime posed. The CSP showed pragmatism, flexibility and a certain
degree of esprit de corps to reach
an understanding and compromise with the military regime. Finally, in the same
year an Economic Pool was created to manage the senior positions in the
Ministry of Finance, Commerce and Economic Affairs. 40 percent of the pool’s
positions were to be filled by non-CSP officers. The CSP perceived it as yet
another effort to undermine their position, as previously these positions were
totally reserved for the CSP.
According
to the changing needs of the country, the Establishment Division, devised a
policy that starting from 1959, all CSP officers will be provided training in fields
pertaining to Economics, Public Administration, Community Development, Finance,
Accounting etc. Resultantly, by 1968, about 79 CSP officers had obtained training
in 17 American and British universities.
Braibanti
records that the Ford Foundation and USAID played a major role in building
training institutions and providing fellowships for the civil servants. By changing
the direction of training to new fields, the Establishment Division was able to
not only strengthen the status of the CSP cadre, but also equipped a generation
of civil servants who could lay claim on professional expertise in financial management,
community development and good governance[7].
This
new breed of civil servants, enthusiastically supported the two programmes of
the military regime, the Basic Democracies and Rural Development Programme.
Both these programmes, enormously increased
the power, privilege, prestige of the CSP cadre officers, who served in the
districts. It also increased their interaction
with the local politicians. Consequently, although the district officer was
able to promote some sort of community development and welfare, yet as a cadre
the CSP ran into conflict with the politicians. In the rural setting of
Pakistan, the Crisis of Governance politicians perceived them as ‘political
manipulators’ and ‘instruments’ of the military regime.
Thus
by conceding entry of the military officers to the CSP cadre, reformulation of
training programmes, and by enthusiastically supporting the policies of the
military regime, the CSP were able to protect their elite status. The cadre was
skillful in resisting and subverting the onslaught of Cornellius Commission
report and its recommendations. But in the aftermath of Ayub’s fall the CSP
could not retain their power and glory. Their reputation was tarnished and
their confidence was shaken. Below Figure 2 is showing the bureaucratic
structure in Ayub regime.
Major
Reports on Administrative Reform in Pakistan
Date Chairman/
Reported Title of Report Author
1949 Pay &
Services Commission M. Munir
1953 The Improvement
of Pubic Administration R. Egger
of
Pakistan
1955
Reorganisation of Pakistan Government for B. Gladieux
Development
1961
Administrative Reorganisation of Pakistan G.
Ahmad
1962 Pay and
Services Commission Report, A. R.
Cornelius
1959-62
1973
Administrative Reform Committee Report K. H. Meer
1981 The Civil
Services Commission Report Anwar-ul-Haq[8]
BIBLOGRAPHY
Ø
Burki,
Shahid Javed Twenty Five Years of the Civil Service in Pakistan: A Re- evaluation.
Asian Survey 9:4 239–254. 1969
Ø
Kennedy,
Charles ,Bureaucracy in Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press. 1987
Ø
Braibanti,
Ralph (1966) Research on the Bureaucracy of Pakistan: A Critique of Sources and Issues. Durham, N.C.: Duke
University Press.
Ø
Ø
Report
of the Administrative Reorganization
Committee(Governmentof Pakistan,President's Secretariat,
Establishment Division, Efficiency and 0 & M Wing) p. IV.
Ø
Ø
Article
by Andrew Wilder on “The Politics of
Civil Service Reform in Pakistan
Ø
Ø
Albert
Gorvine, “The Civil Service under the Revolutionary Government in Pakistan “
Middle East Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3 , pp. 321-336 Published by: Middle East Institute
Ø (Summer, 1965)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4323879 .
Ø
Ø
Ingraham, P. W, The Reform Agenda
For National Civil Service Systems: External Stress And Internal Strains. In
HAGM Bekke, J. L. Perry and TAJ Toonen Civil Service Systems in Comparative
Perspective. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 247 267. . 1996
Skogstad, G. Globalization And Public Policy: Situating Canadian Analyses. Canadian Journal of Political Science. 2000
Skogstad, G. Globalization And Public Policy: Situating Canadian Analyses. Canadian Journal of Political Science. 2000
Ø
Morgan, E. P., Analyzing Fields of
Change in Civil Service Systems in Developing Countries. In Civil Service
Systems in Comparative Perspective Indiana University Press, 1996.
Ø John D. Montgomery, “Sources of Bureaucratic Reform: Problems of Power. Purpose and Politics” (Bloomington:
Comparative Administration Group Occasional Papers, 19671, p. 1
[1] John D. Montgomery, “Sources of Bureaucratic
Reform: Problems of Power. Purpose
and Politics” (Bloomington: Comparative Administration Group Occasional Papers, 19671, p.1
[2] Morgan, E. P., Analyzing Fields of Change in Civil Service
Systems in Developing Countries. In Civil Service Systems in Comparative
Perspective Indiana University Press, 1996.
[3] Albert Gorvine, “The Civil
Service under the Revolutionary Government in Pakistan “ Middle East Journal,
Vol. 19, No. 3 , pp. 321-336 Published
by: Middle East Institute
(Summer, 1965) Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4323879 .
[4]
Burki,
Shahid Javed Twenty Five Years of the
Civil Service in Pakistan: A Re- evaluation. Asian Survey 9:4 239–254., (1969),
P.239
[5]
Ibid,243
[6] Ibid, P.251
[7] Braibanti, Ralph, Research on the Bureaucracy of Pakistan: A
Critique of Sources and Issues. Durham,
N.C.: Duke University Press, 1966
[8] Report of the
Administrative Reorganization Committee(Governmentof Pakistan,President's
Secretariat, Establishment Division,
Efficiency and 0 & M Wing) p. IV.
