close
Thursday March 28, 2024

In an economic downtime, good governance is better than ambitious administration

By Mansoor Ahmad
July 18, 2018

Comment

LAHORE: Pakistan has seen some good administrators, who left no stone unturned endeavouring to improve the lives of people as long as they held the helm of affairs.

However, a few good governors are not going to help the country as well as the people achieve sustainable growth in the long haul until the system remains mired in corruption, red-tapism, and inefficiency.

Only an accountability and rule of law based across-the-board good governance is the remedy to this malady.

It’s tragic to note that no sincere efforts have ever been made in Pakistan to ensure rule-based governance in the country. Rules are flouted openly and the culprits are not held accountable. Some rules that are discriminatory in nature are followed in letter and spirit. For instance general public has to pay full duties and other levies to import luxury cars, but the president, prime minister, army chiefs and some members of judiciary are exempt from these taxes. Top level bureaucrats and heads of federal and provincial governments enjoy vast discretionary powers that enable them to shower a range of benefits on their favorites.

The rulers are aware of such discriminative rules and regulation and few of them may decide not to exercise those powers but they never take a stand to eliminate those privileges.

Fair and transparent rules in fact provide level-playing field to the entire population.

Non-transparent rules coupled with vast discretionary powers provide an undefeatable advantage to the influential. If the rules are strictly followed there is no need for an aggressive and strong administrator. The rules determine the course of action on any issue, be it a contract or an appointment. If rules on appointments and promotions are clearly applied the elected/selected person would not be removed by courts that are now questioning the discretionary powers of rulers and bureaucracy.

In modern rule-based regimes the system electronically ensures that rules are not violated. In case of any violation the system stops operating. In rule-based governance it would be possible to award a contract or a job to unqualified applicants. If an infrastructure project is planned in a rule-based system the contract will not be awarded unless all clearances have been obtained. This includes clearance from environmental department, owner of the land where project would be built, complete report on its viability and no-objection certificate from the heritage department if historical sites are in vicinity of the project.

In both cases the objective is to get a job done promptly and effectively. The major difference between good governance and good administration is that in case of former the chances of error are least but a good administrator can take a wrong decision. We hear about the strict administration of Nawab of Kala Bagh who was the governor of West Pakistan during the Ayub era. He made his own rules and managed West Pakistan with iron hand. The media was gagged and the world was not globally integrated. He kept eyes on prices of daily use item and was very severe on criminals. At a personal level, he did not allow even his children to stay in governor house or enjoy perks that came with his rank. He was ruthless to his personal enemies and such types have no place in today’s world.

Shahbaz Sharif, the former Punjab chief minister, was a good administrator. He completed mega projects much ahead of schedule. In fact his speedy completion of development projects was termed as “Shahbaz Speed”. This strict administration worked well to expedite the construction of underpasses, overhead bridges, and buildings. However it was not as successful in the power projects or orange train project.

There was a problem with the turbines that were installed in haste. All the three power projects were officially commissioned ahead of schedule but full power generation from each of them was two to three months behind schedule. Similarly no proper NOC was obtained for orange train project either from environment department or heritage department and the subsequent litigation delayed the project by 15 months. These issues would not have arisen had the process of tendering been carried out under rule-based governance.

The “Shahbaz mania” impacted other provinces as well. The Peshawar Metro hit snags and cost overruns because of planning loopholes. That means the rules were ignored and on top of that they did not have a dedicated good administrator like Shahbaz. Murad Ali Shah, the former Sindh chief minister, tried to make up for the inactiveness of his predecessor Qaim Ali Shah and ended up doing half the job. Imran Khan, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader, as his past history suggests, is more of an administrator type.

Let us hope that the next elected government adheres to good governance instead of strict administration.