Toward a responsible bureaucracy

The Bangladesh bureaucracy is linked to the administrative reforms in India between 1919 and 1947. The India Act of 1919 defined the responsibility of provinces and introduced the rudiments of responsible government into its administration. The provinces got full autonomy only under the Government of India Act 1935 which made provincial legislature wholly elected and transfer responsibility to council of ministers accountable to legislatures.
The process of transfer of administration to Indian control brought the Indian bureaucracy face to face with the Indian politicians. During the last stage of British rule inter religious rivalries and disorders began to bring neutrality of the civil service under shadow of distrust. Thus India inherited a group of bureaucrats efficient in limited tasks, conservative in orientation, weakened by communalism, distrusted by politicians for having served as the tool of dying imperialism, somewhat authoritative in its attitude within as well as to the people and also weakened at its higher ranks.
The second phase of evolution of bureaucracy in our country between 1947 and 1971 can be linked to administrative reforms in Pakistan. Among the 30 attempts at reorganising the structure of government during 1947-71 only four are considered useful in Bangladesh perspective. However, the provincial government failed to make any fundamental administrative reform due to indifference of the policy-makers. The liberation took a heavy toll of the pre-liberation economic infrastructure. During the last 36 years only patch works are seen in administrative reforms in Bangladesh.
Like other developing countries with colonial past Bangladesh bureaucracy plays a disproportionately large role in policy-making and enjoys a large range of discretionary powers. To control such bureaucracy both legal and political machineries have to be combined. In addition, further checks like the press, public opinion and interest groups may be developed.
The interactions between the bureaucracies and courts are not seen as clearly as those between bureaucracies and legislature. Some of the interactions are judicial review, control over administrative rule making, control over the application and elaboration of administrative rules, adjudications and checks on administrative biases.
The courts in Pakistan enjoyed the power of judicial review during 1947-58. In the Martial Law regime the court's power to judge the constitutionality of a regulation or order issued by a martial law authority was taken away by Articles 2(5) and 3 of the Laws (continuance in force) order 1958. The 1962 constitution by Article 133 (1) (2) intended that the power of judicial review of legislative acts should not be vested in the courts. In Bangladesh, power of judicial review has been drastically restricted by Articles 47 and 102 (2) of the Constitution and subsequent amendments in early 1979. Due to these measures the scope of other judicial powers to control administrative actions has also been restricted. Though judicial review very often is too costly, too slow or too late to remedy a problem out of administrative activity, the threat of judicial review is a constraint that reduces the need for such review. In fact there is a need for restoration of powers of judicial review in this country.
The caretaker government (CTG) has separated judiciary from executive from 1.11.2007 for better dispensation of justice. A part of officers of administrative cadre expressed their strong resentment and disapproval of the government order. They have also shown complete disregard to the order of the Supreme Court. This indicates as to how far our bureaucracy has lost its sense of discipline and responsibility. We do not know how such drama could be enacted by trained and responsible officers of the country. Due to political instability, politicisation, corruption and curtailment of power for judicial review the administrative cadre dared to commit such misdemeanor. For the sake of restoring discipline in the service CTG may take proper action.
Control of bureaucracy needs adjustment of equilibrium of forces already there. Generally speaking, control has three purposes: (i) ensuring that bureaucracy carries out its functions in accordance with goals determined, (ii) ensuring non-violation of general wishes of citizenry, and(iii)ensuring elimination of arbitrary bureaucratic decisions violating individual rights.
Government has already some good provisions for control of government servants such as government servants conduct rules; hierarchy, efficiency and disciplinary rules; field inspection, auditing, judicial powers to the courts to control administrative decisions affecting people's rights. What is actually needed at this stage is strict compliance of rules that already exist.
Judicial control depends on development of more democratic institutions, stronger bar associations, etc. With increase in literacy, lessening of corruption and politicisation and improvement in economic condition of the people it is expected that bureaucracy will emerge as more responsible.
ABMS Zahur is a former joint secretary.