Blending Civil Service & Political Office For Development: The Anambra Promise -By IfeanyiChukwu Afuba

With nearly 24 unbroken years of democratic rule since 1999, political office has become an important feature of our public service. In the event, every possible effort should be made at leveraging potentials of the two dimensions of government machinery, the civil service and political office, for service delivery. But tensions persist in relations between the two cadres with inevitable outcome in governance deficits. How far can an unraveling approach in Anambra State go in harmonising these bodies for the common good?

What are the factors at play? Essentially, there is continued rivalry borne of historical mistrust between the institutions of the Civil Service and the Office of political appointees. The issues revolve around power acquisition and exertion; institutional marginalisation and often unspoken contest for superiority in administration.

Every democratic epoch in Nigeria has been trailed by tales of excesses by political office holders.
Related activities of those British historian, John de St Jorre, described as “high priest of election rigging” and “byname for luxury and ministerial corruption” supposedly led to fall of the First Republic. Blame for the fate of Shehu Shagari’s government has often been attributed to the “weakness” that allowed the reign of super Ministers such as Umaru Dikko and other proximate actors like national chairman of the ruling party in the Second Republic, Adisa Akinloye. The Third Republic was stillborn but the intrigues behind the June 12 crisis seemed suggestive enough. Perhaps, the Fourth Republic scenario is better illustrated in the aborted attempt at presidential third term of office and the diversion of funds for arms to election campaign expenses in 2015.

These features depict a pattern of power corruption that throws up extra ordinary players at each turn. It is presumed that this reign of the political appointee takes place through suppression of the established administrative order embodied in the Civil Service. The notion is strong that the arrival of every new democratic government spells a hard time for the career bureaucrat by way of diminished role, authority and influence.

But the penchant for power play is not entirely alien to the Civil Service. The Yakubu Gowon era was associated with the cult of super Permanent Secretaries who influenced rejection of the 1967 Aburi Accord by the federal government. As the petro – dollars flowed, top civil servants amassed wealth clearly beyond their legitimate income, leading to the Murtala Muhammed’s regime 1975 purge of the Civil Service.

28 years of military rule between 1966 and 1999 left significant impact on the psyche of the typical civil servant – some of who are still in service – at federal and state levels. Civil servants majorly played the legislative and executive roles ordinarily assumed by the political class. Appointment of civil servants as Secretary to the Government, acting Ministers/Commissioners and Local Government Sole Administrators brought considerable political exposure to the hitherto apolitical bureaucrat. There were hardly restrictions to the spheres of government and politics the Civil Service came in contact with. If anything, the visibility and activeness of the Service in Government suited the military’s posture neither to be seen as politicised nor reluctant to leave office.

Civil servants who experienced military rule speak nostalgically of that era of influence and affluence. It makes little impression on them that democratic governments having greater responsibilities and accountability demand, cannot replicate the palace rights of military rule. Unfortunately, the experience of military rule seems to have created a sense of “normalcy” now transferred into engagement with democratic governments.

And with these expectations not materialising in the democratic order, the seed of resentment for civilian administration is sown. These misgivings then find anchor in the bashing of political office holders in the media. With the advent of social media, stigmatizing of political appointees and elected officers has become a daily routine. Administration officials have to prove their innocence of the outlandish allegations against them rather than the other way round. And it becomes easy creating a divide between civil servants and political appointees.

Sometime in the first term of the Willie Obiano governorship, I needed to make urgent media intervention on electricity – related projects of the administration. At the Ministry of Public Utilities, the desk officer directed me to see the Permanent Secretary. After identifying myself as a Special Assistant on Media and stating my mission, the Permanent Secretary casually told me to go and write an application to access the relevant information. Did I hear him right? I looked him straight in the eyes with bewilderment written on my expression and saw that he meant his words. Time is of essence, I launched out, but he cut in: “That’s the rule.” The Commissioner was out of town. But mercifully, I found a way of cutting through the red tape to get what I wanted. Midway into Obiano’s second term, our rule – swearing bureaucrat retired and got a political appointment. I congratulated him on his new position, observing that he would now be joining us to write applications for information. He attempted a smile and quickly changed the subject.

However, the tone of government leadership can affect the performance of it’s team as well as public ‘s perception of same. Appointed political office holders can only abuse their positions to the extent their principal allows them. Professor Chukwuma Soludo’s Anambra State invites closer attention because of defining policies with potential to keep the executive team focused and diminish resentment by the Civil Service.

Soludo as Governor – elect had developed a problem – solving questionnaire towards the constitution of his cabinet and other offices. It’s interesting to learn that this task – specific approach continues to determine appointments till date. Underlining the policy, Soludo announced at the inauguration of his cabinet that there will be no reshuffles; you either add value in your area of responsibility or you disengage from the government. This is a salutary step with the merit of discouraging tourism in government.

The focus – compliant regulation was followed up with the demonstration that political office is not an opportunity for lavish remuneration. To this end, a downward review of salaries and allowances attached to appointive offices has since come into effect. Anambra State might well have the least pay scheme for political appointees in the country today. Taking away the remuneration dichotomy opens a bridge between the civil and political estates.

Soludo should now place the State’s shared values at the forefront of administrative efforts. The goal of a prosperous and livable Anambra State is sufficient to unite the Civil Service and Political Office. Exclusive committees should take the backseat; critical ad hoc and standing committees should have joint membership from both sides. Execution of schedules can be improved with timelines. Minuted files should state action time frame. Contractors too can be kept on their toes by a provision that project billboards clearly state date for completion of the contract.

Afuba is Director, Public Administration Circle, Awka.