Civil services in Pakistan

Answer 1

Presently, the Civil Services of Pakistan are divided into 14 groups and services, namely, Pakistan Audit and Accounts Service, Commerce & Trade Group, Customs & Excise Group, District Management Group, Foreign Service of Pakistan, Income Tax Group, Information Group, Military Lands & Cantonment Group, Office Management Group, Police Service of Pakistan, Postal Group, Railways Group, Secretariat Group, Ex-Cadre Officers.

Out of the 14 groups and services, 11 are called groups, 03 are called services i.e. Foreign Service of Pakistan, Pakistan Audit and Accounts Service, and Police Service of Pakistan, and one is neither called a group nor a service i.e. ex-cadre officers.

The induction to all these groups and services is done primarily through the Central Superior Services (CSS) examination conducted by the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC). As such, the common sense demands that all central superior services are called 'services' to maintain uniformity. The nomenclature of the entry examination itself is 'central superior services' examination and not 'central superior groups and services' examination. So, it is in the fitness of things to call all groups as services such as District Management Service, Commerce & Trade Service, Customs & Excise Service and so on.

Under the administrative reforms of 1973, all the services and cadres were "merged into a single unified graded structure with equality of opportunity for all who enter the service at any stage based on the required professional and specialized competence necessary for each job".

"All `classes' among government servants were abolished and replaced by a single unified graded structure to open the road upwards to the very top to all on merit and required educational and professional qualifications. The use of `service' labels such as FSP, PSP, etc. were discontinued forthwith."

While the service labels of the Foreign Service of Pakistan, the Pakistan Audit & Accounts Service and the Police Service of Pakistan remained untouched, the service label of the Civil Service of Pakistan was changed to that of the District Management Group. Not only this, but also the very Civil Service of Pakistan was disbanded.

Although the service label was changed in the case of the Civil Service of Pakistan, the designations of the commissioner, deputy commissioner and assistant commissioner remained intact and so were their responsibilities, authority and accountability.

With the introduction of the Local Government (LG) System under the devolution of power in 2001, the very designations of the commissioner, deputy commissioner and assistant commissioner were changed to district coordination officer (DCO) and deputy district officer (DDO).

Not only the designations were changed, but also the responsibilities, authority and accountability of these officers were changed.

Under the LG system, the position of the commissioner and deputy commissioner who were previously administrative heads of a division and a district respectively, was reduced to that of a district coordination officer reporting to the city nazim or district nazim. The commissioner was replaced as administrative head of the division by the city nazim and the deputy commissioner by the district nazim.

As far as the LG system is concerned, there is nothing wrong with it as such. It is primarily based on the prevailing mayoral systems of the U.K. and the USA. The problem lies with the implementation of the system. If the commissioner and the deputy commissioner retained their designations, responsibilities and authority and were made accountable to the city nazim or district nazim, there would have been no change in the administrative set up. City Nazim or District Nazim would have remained the head of the division or district. Even under the mayoral systems of the UK and the USA, the administrative setup below the Mayor comprises knowledgeable, experienced and seasoned bureaucrats who run the administration independently and without political pressure.

Presently, the city nazims and district nazims, by and large, do not have the required knowledge, experience and expertize to replace the commissioners and the deputy commissioners. As the situation stands today, it is expected that the DCO will perform the functions of the commissioner or deputy commissioner but remain a coordination officer and not an administrative head.

On the contrary, the capital city police officer (CCPO) and the district police officer (DPO) are accountable to the city nazim and district nazim respectively, for Law and Order ONLY. All other police functions remain within the jurisdiction of the respective police officers. They are not designated as coordination officers like their counterparts in DMG. It is also unclear as to what law and order entails and what is meant by being responsible to the city nazim or district nazim for law and order.

As reported on the website http://www.csspk.com , "the President of Pakistan himself assured the DMG officers about their role in the affairs of the country saying that he expects the DMG officers to be the standard bearers of devolution."

In his letter addressed to each DMG officer he categorically stated that he visualizes the future role of DMG in civil society as of a public service, motivated by the highest ideals of dedication, capability and responsiveness to public needs."

What the President of Pakistan desires and expects is absolutely right. It is only the Civil Service of Pakistan, by whatever name it is called, that is knowledgeable, experienced and capable of managing districts, divisions, sub-divisions, provinces and the federal government departments. However, these officers can not be expected, in all fairness, to deliver with incapacitated limbs. The responsibilities, authority and accountability of the DMG officers and their present designations need to be reviewed and remade to make them effective administrators.