Sitting politicians cannot be public servants. It is insane

Mar 29, 2022 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

Kaieteur News – There isn’t a day that passes in this psychologically disheveled nation that a person or an organisation doesn’t trumpet the independent mind and the independent stance.
Then, as the days, months and years unfold, things happen and you wonder if Guyana has any independent minds at all. Once you say, you are not politically biased and you take an objective, holistic look at the society, then your stance and views have to be, as you say, objective.
Going back several years now, I have been critical and disgusted at this self-righteous claim of independent thinking. My attitude stems from one determinant only – if you are open-minded and impartial then your voice and pen have to be seen and heard over a wide range of situations, not solely on state behaviour and ruling politicians.
Ruling politicians are people who must be constantly surveyed for commonsensical reason – power is too colossal and penetrating not to be constantly monitored by society. I think no nation can survive if there are no civil society voices and independent newspapers.
But a society becomes crooked when in pursuit of defaulting power-holders, it turns a blind eye to voices of critical thought that lack credibility. What happens then is that the moral compass is lost. This is what is happening in the US. In its dislike for the Democratic Party, Republicans have embraced right-wing extremists who have the most sickening theories about the Democratic Party and through a gradual process, these bizarre rumours become part of mainstream discourse. The US has now seen the action of the wife of a Supreme Court jurist that embraces these weird theories about the Democratic Party and the US government.
The subject I am about to express my thoughts on, I have written about several times on this page during the past year. It is about the anomaly of ruling politicians when they lose power and still want to be part of the public sector.
In those previous columns, my arguments have been three-fold. One – it is not an accepted arrangement in any country in any part of the world. No ruling party will retain a practising hierarchical member of the opposition in a sensitive public service job. It just doesn’t happen in the real world.
Two – there is bound to be a huge area of distrust on the part of the ruling organisation when a national figure, high up in an opposition party, heads a very important public service institution. And three – it is morally incumbent on political appointees to do the ethically right thing and resign when a new government comes in. My friend, Dr. Mark Kirton, who held a political appointment as advisor told me that he resigned immediately on the change of government in 2020.
I will quote from yesterday’s Stabroek News’ editorial and hope that the quote brings some response from some people and organisations. Here are the words: “Targeting of public servants who discharge their functions professionally and are not inclined to be directed by politicians has been a well-established malignancy here. The recent example of at the Environmental Protection Agency is a case in point and the PPP/C administration must not be allowed to get away with (it).”
After the Ali presidency came into being, there were political appointees from the APNU+AFC serving in sensitive public sector institutions. One person was a chief negotiator for his party, in the renegotiation of the Cummingsburg Accord, and sat as one of the chief policy-makers for his party at a time when he held a public sector occupation.
If after the change of government, these people had removed their political status, then their retention, including the situation at the EPA that Stabroek News has mentioned five times before, was a definite consideration and one could have taken objection to their removal. Opposition Leader, Desmond Hoyte gave his approval of Dr. Nanda Gopaul to be permanent secretary in the Office of the President during the reign of President Jagdeo because Dr. Gopaul had officially declared that he was no longer interested in any form of politics and had disbanded the political party he headed.
The priceless principle of political appointees resigning on loss of power is a universal one. I ask the question here and I am desperately hoping for some feedback. Was it normal for someone to retain their prominent position in the public service while he/she still served in the leadership of the opposition party? If your answer is yes, then should ruling parties retain top opposition figures in the leadership of sensitive public sector bodies as a matter of policy? Finally, name a country on Planet Earth where that happened.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---