In ordinary parlance, bureaucracy stands for a system of government by departments which are managed by state officials, not by elected representatives. However, to get into bureaucracy in the sub-continental perspective, we need to go back to the period of British rule, for it is the British who for the first time introduced here an organised system of non-political bureaucracy led by Indian Civil Service (ICS). There is no denying the fact that the ICS officers used to enjoy a very high social prestige with concomitant politico-economic power and influence. Accordingly, very brilliant graduates of high social stature of both Indian and British origin would join the ICS. Although the critics would say that these cadre officers were used by the British to perpetrate their colonial rule in India, the fact remains that they were also the backbone of the civil administration of India and thus had definite contribution to the politico-socio-economic uplift of the then Indian people.

In August 1947, Pakistan was born out of the sub-continent and so was the Civil Service of Pakistan(CSP) out of the ICS. There were also other specialised cadres albeit in general, the CSP consisted of the best bunch and invariably enjoyed easy ascendancy over other cadres. At the initial period of Pakistan, the prestige and privileges of the bureaucrats were almost comparable with those of their predecessors in British India. The standard of recruitment procedure, professional training, discipline, service structure and promotions etc also remained intact. In 1958 when military bureaucrats took power in Pakistan by promulgating martial law , the CSPs and other civil bureaucrats had got an initial shock but their role as civil servants was never disparaged. However, the situation was never as before, as the army rulers needed only the very obedient civil servants to prolong their military dictatorship, they began a sort of politicization of the civil bureaucracy in Pakistan. Notwithstanding such disagreeable developments, the civil bureaucracy of Pakistan remained very much a prominent part of the total system of governance.

In Bangladesh, the situation was quite different. With not many honourable exceptions, the sagacity and far-sightedness of our political leadership in general were spectacularly lacking compared to those of either Pakistan or India. Besides, the establishment depended heavily upon political activists and sycophants in preference to the professional civil servants. The most unfortunate part of the episode was that a division was created among both the civil and military bureaucrats in terms of freedom-fighters and non-freedom-fighters which ultimately affected the efficiency of the bureaucratic system. There is no doubt that the freedom-fighters were the great sons of the soil and the nation shall remain ever grateful to them for their priceless sacrifices. Again, there were scores of ways to pay tribute to them. Thus was the beginning but not the end of the politicization of the bureaucracy in Bangladesh.

The next blow to the bureaucracy was hurled in 1973 when the 1st batch of Bangladesh Civil Service (BCS) and other sister services were recruited just on the basis of viva voce conducted by the Bangladesh Public Service Commission. Against the advertised 300 Class-1 vacant posts, more than two thousand people were recruited generally on political grounds. The most strange part of this recruitment was that there was not even any intelligence or psychological test and that the vast multitude of Class-1 officers were from very contrasting academic background, from 1st class university post-graduates (though a few only) to ordinary 3rd division holding college graduates.

On the other hand, Bangladesh inherited the civil bureaucracy of Pakistan but in a much feeble form and structure. May we not forget the fact that barring a few respectable personalities, the vast majority of Bangladeshi civil servants were recruited to the Pakistan civil service on the basis of quota earmarked for the then East Pakistan. No wonder, people used to make fun of these civil servants as "quota CSPs" or "quota bureaucrats". Then again, with a few admirable exceptions, the merits and capabilities of the majority members of the then East Pakistan Civil Service (EPCS) were no match for those of the CSPs. Consequently, from the very beginning, Bangladesh had to face a major brain decline in the total civil administrative set-up and the legacy still remains, for the political leadership could hardly realise the importance of an efficient, meritorious and honest civil bureaucracy in the total national perspective and good governance.

Besides, the considerable disarray in the academic arena and rapid deterioration in the standard of education also significantly affected the subsequent intakes in the civil and other sister services of the bureaucracy.

Subsequent governments too resorted to almost similar slackening in the recruitment process as also in the promotion and posting matters to sub-serve their respective political purposes. However, most expansive politicization and moral decadence took place during the autocratic regime of H M Ershad. While the civil bureaucracy was used to prolong the despotic rule, the age-old and time-tested civil administrative structure was deliberately destroyed. His upazila system of local administration failed to do any good to the rural people, as most of the so-called elected chairmen of the upazilas could not play any constructive role in the rural uplift. Likewise, the so-called decentralisation of the judiciary also proved futile. This was a time when many honest and dedicated officials were dismissed or forcibly retired without assigning any reason.

The successive elected governments, though depended upon the civil bureaucracy for routine administration or development work, resorted to political appointments in many important state establishments including the Public Service Commission. Besides, many retired civil servants were re-employed mostly on political affiliation, blocking thereby the scope of promotion of the junior ones. Then again, in sharp contrast to what was available for the military establishments, little efforts were given to standardise the recruitment procedure, training facilities, service structure etc of the civil bureaucracy. Virtually, nothing has been done to attract the brilliant university students in different superior services. Thus, except a few fortunate high-ups, the civil bureaucracy in general was subject to continuous apathy which ultimately resulted in the qualitative deterioration in the total system of governance.

For the first time in the history of the Public Service Commission, allegations such as document-tampering, question-paper leakage etc were raised. While the incidences of corrupt practices are proliferating beyond imagination, the law-enforcing agencies are almost helpless before the political pressure group. The Cabinet Secretary of the ruling government told a recent seminar that "the lawmakers would not allow the police to take actions against the party leaders and the activists and this is the fundamental reason for deterioration of law and order." While politicization of the bureaucracy disgustingly damaged the entire polity, a new dimension has been added in that the senior bureaucrats themselves are now inclined to get political colour to get short and long-term favours. While the short-term favour includes good postings and perks, rapid promotions, extension of services, etc, the long-term one is of course revolves round such aspirations as induction in the party politics leading to influential positions in the cabinet or similar bounties. There is no doubt that such self-seeking stance on the part of the senior bureaucrats tells upon their accountability to the republic.

May we not forget that the civil administration is totally a specialised job and there is no scope to belittle the role of the civil servants in the socio-economic advancement of the people as also in maintaining the law and order and administrative discipline in the society which comprises people of varying views and dispositions. Therefore, for a country like Bangladesh where still majority of the people are virtually illiterate and living below poverty-line, there is no alternative to an efficient bureaucracy. While elected representatives of the people can give direction or formulate policy on total national advancement, the professional part of doing the job of good governance depends squarely on the efficiency of the bureaucrats en bloc.

Hafeejul Alam is a management specialist.