EDITORIAL
The Massive Transfers of Bureaucracy for Holding Transparent Elections are an Administrative Joke
What is the rationale? Before doing any administrative exercise, it is the primary query. What is the need for an administrative transaction? In the case of holding elections in Pakistan, it is generally assumed that transfers of bureaucracy are a fundamental requirement to conduct a transparent election. However, the transaction requires serious introspection and investigation.
The Election Commission’s constitutional obligation is to hold elections; therefore, all administrative and judicial human resources are placed at their disposal. Generally, it is assumed that bureaucracy develops administrative and political affiliations in a particular position; therefore, it is essential to transfer them. What is rationality in it? Suppose a department’s secretary is transferred to the other department in the same position; how can it affect the transparency of an election? It is pretty bizarre if one is so influential and politically motivated, will he not affect the new assignment?
The massive transfers before elections are an administrative farce needing more administrative wisdom. Furthermore, the whole political transition from the political executive to the permanent executive is a ridiculous change of command. The bureaucracy performs in teams. As there is a general cadre of bureaucracy, transfers are constantly recurring. Then, it isn’t easy to formulate teams who could work in organizations for longer. However, whenever teams of bureaucracies are settled in the departments or districts, one of the core members is transferred, and the whole performance is compromised. It becomes even more severe when the whole bureaucracy is transferred for the elections, and thus, the system of governance collapses. This administrative disease is so deep that even the teachers are not spared.
Then, it is even more interesting to note that these transfers are not done to ensure transparent elections but to manage elections. It is a known fact now. The governments intend to appoint those civil servants, including police officers, who could manage elections for a particular party. Hence, it is a reverse manipulation of a popular electoral scheme.
Lastly, there needs to be a rationale for conducting massive transfers. These transfers obstruct organizational performance and also do not fulfil the primary obligation of holding transparent elections. The exercise is financially irrational and administratively unproductive. Then, if the public human resource is politicized, why not throwing them out of the system?
Pakistan is a strange governance entity. It is the status quo and replication of archaic precedents. The solutions are the same; the police shall continue to place diversions even if the aim is a smooth traffic flow. Likewise, the election commission shall continue to transfer bureaucracy to ensure transparent elections.
