THE Leaning Tower of Pisa cannot be straightened unless it is rebuilt. But, although attempts have been made to keep the tower from listing further, it has too much history on its side for such a drastic move to be considered.

The civilservice ofPakistanisjustlike the Leaning Tower of Pisa, glorious in its historical perspective but really hard to take apart and rebuild. Nevertheless, last month a decision by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif regarding the promotion of bureaucrats to grade 21 has, in fact, indicated an interest in rebuilding.

The Central Selection Board, in a meeting held earlier in the year, had recommended the promotion of bureaucrats from Grade 20 to Grade 21. The fact that Grade 21 officers form the top tier of the civilian bureaucracy makes the recommendations of the CSB very significant.

All officers with complete formal documentation were recommended for promotions. (Ironically, military commanders also met around the same time to consider promotions of brigadiers to the rank of major general. Some, reportedly, were superseded to ensure those with impeccable records were recommended for top slots).

Thankfully, the prime minister, being the signing authority for civilian promotions, put his foot down and deferred the promotions of many officers for want of a better service record. Almost 40pc of the officers recommended by the CSB have been rejected by the prime minister with instructions to be more objective in assessment and make recommendations in light of the Supreme Court decision in the Orya Maqbool Abbasi vs. Federation of Pakistan case.

The court had observed that `it would be [a] great achievement if it is added in the policy to hold an inquiry of the civil servant while sending his case for promotion and also examine his family assets at the time when he joined the service including lifestyle, expense on children`s education, expenses on children`s marriage, foreign tours as well as ... ascertain the politicalafHliationofsuchacandidate to make the bureaucracy free from political affiliation as it has been observed in [a j speech by the Quaid-i-Azam to the civil officers in Peshawar in April, 1948`.

Majority of the officers in Grade 20 or above in the government machinery come from 12 service groups, whose vacancies are filled via the CSS exam. Objective evaluation of these officers right from the time they join government service in Grade 17 is required for fair judgement of their credentials rather than banking onarbitrary reports from an intelligence agency at the verge of their promotion to Grade 21, especially when such reports can be subject to bias depending on the ruling government. So, for implementing the Supreme Court judgement, a complete overhaul of the system is required under the following guidelines.

Firstly, an assessment every five years of all bureaucrats would make this procedure more transparent, as at least five reports would be generated for an officer under consideration for a Grade 21 position and an assessment cannot be biased over such an extensive period of time.

The suspicion of living beyond one`s means should be evaluated on the basis of such reports, tax returns filed by the officer and his general lifestyle.

Secondly, performance evaluation reports (PERs) truthfully evaluating the officer are hardly written; so-called notions of courtesy, friendship, camaraderie, goodwill or even animosity overpower all need for objective evaluation and the result is that every ofñcer is evaluated arbitrarily.

The ofñcers should also be subject to scrutiny on the basis oftheirevaluation of their juniors. If somebody can be dishonest in giving an opinion about someone working under him, then they are unlikely to hold their own when it comes to higher responsibilities.

In order to preclude anomalous PERs, a 12-member committee should be formed with officers of integrity from each service group. There should be no chairman of this committee, and every member should be equally empowere d. This would exclude the possibility ofany personalrelationship influencing the judgement.

This committee should evaluate civil servants right from the beginning of their careers annually by conducting interviews and peer reviews. Departmental influences on evaluation would thus be minimised.

Currently, the CSB has mostly federal secretaries as members. Since generally they belong to a couple of service groups, it clouds their ability to fairly assess officers from other groups and also, they hold portfolios under a certain political government, which can result in partiality on the basis of political affiliations.

Hats off to the prime minister for challenging the norm of promotions in the civil service. But the bureaucracy needs more than this the norm needs to be rewritten. • The writer is a former civil servant.

syedsaadatwrites@gmail.com