With the federal government’s approval of a revised ordinance for the Higher Education Commission, the HEC has lost its autonomy to a great extent. Most of all, it is the reduction in the term of its chairperson from four years to just two years that will keep any incumbent at the mercy of the federal government. When a new head of any organization assumes office it takes at least a year to understand the challenges and then plan to meet those challenges in an effective manner. There is also a serious question of organizational dynamics – let alone office politics – that any new head of organization needs to understand and tackle, especially in a country such as Pakistan where interests of personalities appear to be more important than organizational priorities. The two-year term will be even shorter than the tenure normally enjoyed by deans and vice-chancellors at degree-awarding institutions. This is as unwise a decision as it could be. The government has also increased two seats for private members in the commission of the HEC which is its main decision-making body. This alteration also hints of a desire by the government to control the HEC by manipulating the appointments of private members who may render the HEC chairperson powerless.
Surprisingly, the members will have four-year terms – making them more enduring and settled in their positions than the chairperson. For all practical purposes, the chairperson will not be able to make any major plans or strategies and see them through to produce tangible results in the two-year term. The fact that the concerned ministries have approved these changes without even considering the long-term impact shows an uncanny shortsightedness on the part of the top decision makers in these ministries. Of course, the HEC needed some improvements but not in the way the PTI government has envisioned and is trying to implement them. For example, there was a need to change the composition of the HEC commission which at present has no representation from any of the provincial commissions, no representative of teachers’ associations and nobody to speak on behalf of university students. Moreover, a look at the list of commission members shows that there is hardly anybody properly qualified in education, meaning with a terminal degree in education management itself. Being a bureaucrat, businessman, doctor, economist, or engineer, does not make one an educationist.
This called for a major overhaul to make the commission a truly concerned, expert, and representative body rather than a mixed bag of serving and retired officials and randomly chosen professionals. Higher education is a serious matter and the government should not try to manage it with the help of ordinances. Such issues are a concern of all provinces and the federal government should have sought suggestions from them. Meanwhile, the now former chairman of the HEC Dr Tariq Banuri has challenged the decision in the Sindh High Court and has also said that he had been threatened and asked to comply with decisions that allowed private universities to move into partnership with public universities in a manner that could lead to these private entities seizing the large amounts of land belonging to public universities. In addition, Dr Banuri also says he was asked to make decisions that did not fall in line with the policy of accountability and transparency advocated by the PTI government. Sadly, the government is making a mockery of higher education in the country. We hope those in office remember that not allowing change and holding on to the status quo only stifles development and holds back progress.