Reorganising South Sudan’s Civil Service for Economic Recovery – A Personal Perspective (Part 1 of 2).
By John A. Akec
Konyo Konyo Market- Juba- South Sudan- Copy Right JA Akec 2017 |
A View from Periphery
A diplomat I met at a function in Juba recently confided
that the challenge posed by current economic crisis to the stability of South
Sudan far outweighs the threats posed by armed non-state actors. To overcome
these challenges, he proposed that the government moves speedily to appoint
competent civil servants and technocrats in key positions at government
institutions to lead the reforms. That the government spells out a strategy for
turning the economy around, follows transparency in reporting on revenues and
spending, and eliminates the leakages of funds through misappropriation. That
it should also consider incorporating in its action plans the technical advice
of the IMF and World Bank on economic reforms. These measures will help to restore
confidence in government’s commitment to reforms. That done with honesty and
commitment, he believes the government will find willing development partners
to contribute financial resources to help in implementation of the economic
recovery plan. Failing that, the diplomat fears, South Sudan might have to
brace for more political and social upheavals on the road ahead. And I could
not agree more with these candid observations. And here are my reasons for
agreeing.
What is the Matter with Our Civil Service?
Right from its inception in 2005, the Government of South
Sudan has never had the kind of bureaucracy and the caliber of civil servants capable
of developing policies and plans which it could translate into executable projects
to realise national developmental goals. There are competent civil servants in our
public sector but they only form a small minority. This was because political
patronage and politics of accommodation, as opposed to merit, dominated
appointments of undersecretaries, directorships of government departments, independent
commissions, county commissioners, and payam administrators. That result has
been the gross mismanagement of public finances, impoverishment of the country,
and subsequently the onset of political crisis and civil war in 2013.
Because of inability of our civil servants who run our
public sector to conceive and execute development plans, all major cities
including the capital Juba lack electricity from grid as well as other
essential utilities such as running water, sewage system, public transit, and broadband
internet connectivity of the sort enjoyed by our East African neighbours, among
others. As a country, we are yet to establish credible health system capable of
preventing death from many common treatable illnesses. Our public universities
are underfunded and ill equipped to assist the nation in development of its human
capital. No investment has occurred in technical and vocational training (TVET)
system that can equip our youth with practical skills our economy needs to grow
and diversify. What is more, financial markets necessary for moblising savings
for business investment, physical capital accumulation, and access to credit by
businesses and consumers have remained unregulated and underdeveloped. Land property
rights that protect individuals and investors are not entrenched in our legal
system. And above all, our nation is yet to establish efficient tax
administration for revenue mobilisation, and a functioning pension fund to look
after retiring public sector employees.
This state of affairs is in the main a by-product of ineffective
public service that has excelled in extracting value for private gains as
opposed to adding value for the common good; and thus, draining the country of
its scarce resources. Left unchecked, our civil service far from being the
bulwark of state-building, will remain the albatross on nation’s neck, and the Achilles heel that undermines
our progress towards prosperity. And with the passing of time, an incapable
civil service will pose existential threat to the South Sudanese state that we
all cherish to thrive and prosper.
That is not
to lay all the blame for the current economic and political stagnation at our civil service’s door.
However, it cannot be emphasised strongly enough that without credible
government bureaucracy in place that is run by competent civil servants, our government
will struggle for a long time to come to deliver on promised
prosperity; and the ongoing efforts to turn the economy around will hardly bear
fruits.
And to be credible, one must acknowledge that the
responsibility for instituting competent and effective institutions of
governance ultimately lies with the political authority of our country;
especially the office of the President, his deputies, advisors, and his cabinet
ministers; as well as the states governors and their ministers. And without
their buy-in and
commitment, there can be no hope for reform of our civil service, and consequently
there will be no hope for economic recovery anytime soon.
Fixing the Problem: Management Sciences and Ethics to the Rescue
So what sort of civil service is competent enough to deliver
on its mandate? The reader is bound to wonder. It is a sensible question to
pose, although not too hard to address if there is political will. Anyone
taking top civil service position must have proven expertise in the subject
matter of the department or ministry they are leading. He or she must also have
solid grasp of management sciences and public administration, as well as ICT
and communications skills, analytical and financial skills, knowledge of project
management, ability to monitor and evaluate projects and write excellent
reports. A civil servant must have good appreciation of law in regards to the
mandate of his or her department. He or she should be able to see the bigger
picture, and can negotiate complex agreements. The civil servant worth his or
her salt should be able to think strategically and lead by objective in order
translate societal aspirations, as expressed by the government’s vision, into concrete
realities on the ground. And above all, he or she must be ethical with
impeccable integrity, and be of good moral character; to count but a few of essential
attributes of a competent civil servant.
In India, for example, the brightest young graduates dream to
land jobs as government’s civil servants (being one of the most coveted, respected,
secure, and rewarded vacations in that great country). And the brightest Indian
often live their dream by excelling in written selection tests, tough interview
regimes, and surviving fierce competition against peers. In Britain,
recruitment into civil service is through highly competitive written exams,
with very few openings every year. Even young John Maynard Keynes with a BA
first class in mathematics from Cambridge could not make it first time into a
UK treasury job, as he was beaten by his Cambridge classmate. Keynes had to
contend with alternative employment as a lowly statistics clerk in East India Company,
before quitting to embark on building his illustrious academic career that
later turned him into a world renown economist, with a school of thought after
his name.
In their book Reinventing
Government: How Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector [in
America], David Osborne and Ted Gaebler tells how American cities were once
run like personal fiefdoms by mayors who ditched out favors and jobs to
immigrant leaders in exchange for securing immigrants bloc votes as well as diverting
public funds for personal gains. However, starting from 1890s and for three
decades that followed, the American statesmen such as Theodore Roosevelt,
Woodrow Wilson, and Louis Brandeis waged war on the inefficient US’s public
sector and replaced it with a bureaucracy led by civil servants who were recruited
through competitive process involving written exams. And once recruited, civil
servants climbed the career ladder through stringent promotion system. They
were also legally insulated from unnecessary outside political interference,
and protected from arbitrary dismissal.
And to attract the best and the brightest, top civil
servants are highly remunerated, not only to motivate them but that none should
be in want least they be tempted to misappropriate public funds. This puts a
high cost to their prestigious career should anyone be found guilty of gross misconduct.
The above practice is almost the universally accepted mark
of credible civil service. Short of that, one must call it something else. And
something else is what describes South Sudan’s civil service. And the results
are not good.
Bureaucracy Not a
Panacea but a Necessary Evil in State-Building
Bureaucratic systems have been criticised for their
inability to respond quickly to changing operating environments. However, bureaucracies
and application of scientific management have served many countries in the West
beginning with industrial revolution in 19th and 20th century,
a period that saw phenomenal growth of large enterprises that were characterised
by complex inter-relationships of people and machines. This forced the pioneers
of scientific management such as Frederick Taylor (1856-1915) in the US to
argue that well tried management techniques should be applied to solve organisational
problems, as opposed to relying on personal experiences, and what Taylor
described as ‘seat-of-the-pants’ judgments.
It is worth mentioning that bureaucracy as efficient way for
organising a government is far from being a Western invention as one might be
led to think. This is because the Chinese dynasties, beginning with Qin dynasty
(221-205 BC), were run by a bureaucracy whose officials were a special elite
who were versed in calligraphy and philosophy, and who were selected by
competitive written exams. The Qin dynasty pioneering establishment of
bureaucracy marked the beginning of imperial China and resulted in
unprecedented period of uninterrupted stability that lasted for over two
thousand years. There is no doubt that a key contributing factor to that
stability was the competent bureaucracy that was set up by Qin dynasty.
But it was in the West where management theories and ideas
on modern bureaucratic systems were developed in more systematic and scientific
manner. The French industrialist, Henry Fayol (1841-1925), advanced the concept
of universality of management principles and efficiency of specialization in
carrying out tasks, the essence of authority and responsibility, and management
hierarchy with its chains of commands. The German sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920)
complemented Fayol’s ideas and developed key innovations that underpin modern
bureaucracy, as we know it today, by proposing the design of procedures to be
followed closely by an official in order to improve the administrative
efficiency, while eliminating the arbitrariness that is often associated with
discretionary decision-making processes.
To begin the reform of our civil service, South Sudan can start
by infusing the public sector with competent civil servants who will assist in
designing more efficient state bureaucracy that will encompass all levels of
the government (central, state, county, and payam). This will put an end to arbitrariness
in decision-making and create goal-driven institutions that are capable of
translating government visions and polices into concrete realities. Once
established, and with passing of time, our bureaucracy can be gradually relaxed
by injection with doses of entrepreneurial spirit and flexibility which are essential
for any nation to thrive in the fast-phased twenty-first century global economy.
This calls for an urgent action by political authority of our country if a
speedy economic recovery is to be realised.
Part 2 of this article will look at other measures that will
improve the capacity of civil service, as well as the institutional designs and
arrangements that need to in place in order to enhance the ability of South
Sudan to weather the storm of economic crisis, and bring about a speedy
economic recovery.