PM Note Puts Credibility Of CSB In Tatters

Credibility of high powered Central Selection Board — which recommends senior level promotions in civilian bureaucracy — is in tatters after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif recently referred back dozens of cases of promotion to the Board for being flawed.

What could be termed as a charge-sheet against the CSB, the prime minister pointed out how officers with doubtful integrity and poor efficiency have been recommended for promotion by the Board. The CSB is headed by the chairman FPSC and comprises several federal secretaries and others as members.

Official sources told The News that in writing, the prime minister while referring back more than 40 cases of promotion to the CSB for reconsideration, the CSB is told that in a number of cases there are conspicuous inconsistencies, deficits and lacunae in the recommendations for promotion made by the Board.

“A number of officers who, in wide public perception and opinion, have patently poor integrity and/or very little professional competence have been recommended for promotion, and in whose case the Board does not appear to have carried out due diligence to ascertain the veracity of the information placed before it,” the CSB is told by the premier, adding, “The Board has also recommended for promotion quite a few officers despite their adverse special reports, which the Board had itself called for.”

The Board, the prime minister observed, has recommended for promotion even those officers in whose case the opinion of its members was in serious conflict rather than carrying out a detailed further scrutiny of their antecedents prior to making any recommendation in their case.

It is also pointed out by the chief executive that several officers who had been recommended for deferment or supersession by the Central Selection Board in its previous meeting held in May 2015, other than those who were deferred for purely technical reasons, have now been recommended for promotion by the Board.

“In some cases the justification given by the Board for such recommendation is clearly inconsistent with the available record,” the CSB is told. Without mincing his words, the prime minister conveyed to the CSB, “It appears that the guiding principles for fair, judicious, equitable and merit-based promotion of public servants laid down clearly in the judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court in CP No. 22 of 2013 and CP No. 41 and 66 of 2015 have escaped the attention of the members of the Board.”

The prime minister reminded the Board that the spirit and objective behind the constitution of CSB with a diverse composition — ranging from members of the civil services to public representatives — was essentially to enable the Board to receive comprehensive and encompassing feedback from persons belonging to different fields and backgrounds, bringing with them in-depth knowledge and varied experiences, upon which the Board could base its recommendations.

The premier said it was the responsibility of the CSB to place the officers in the categories specified in the ‘Objective Assessment Form’, i.e. A, B and C, based on their integrity, potential and competence in a fair and equitable manner.

It is also pointed out that in many cases, while conducting this exercise, the prime minister’s observations recorded in his orders dated 3rd April 2014 on the recommendations of the CSB held in 2014 also appear to have escaped the attention of the CSB.

Referring to certain cases, the prime minister told the CSB that the Board had recommended for promotion an officer who had been recommended for deferment or supersession by the CSB held in May 2015; an officer widely reputed to be corrupt or inefficient had been recommended for promotion by the Board; the Board had recommended an officer for promotion despite an adverse special report or in whose case the opinion of the members of the Board was in conflict.

The sources said that the prime minister is of the considered opinion that approving all recommendations of the CSB, without any regard to the competence and integrity of officers, as reflected in the carefully collected information and reports, would be both very unfair — in particular, in the case of officers who have served diligently and honestly throughout their careers — and against the public interest and trust, apart from vitiating the established norms of good governance and institutional propriety. It would also be an aberrant departure from the established practice of the present government to ensure merit-based promotions, which has also been upheld by the superior courts.

(Published in Monthly Tribute International on 01-03-2017)