THE top three posts in Malaysia’s government service responsible for public administration, law and order are the chief secretary to the government (KSN), attorney-general (A-G) and chief justice (CJ).
KSN is head of the civil service, which comprises administrative, professional and technical services. All secretaries-general of ministries are accountable to KSN. A-G, who is chief prosecutor and legal adviser to the government, and CJ, who is head of the judiciary, are responsible for the justice system.
Their appointments are extremely important for good governance. In many advanced countries, as well as international institutions and specialised United Nations agencies, the top positions are filled following a robust selection and screening process, where the appointments are open to competition from within the departments, as well as outside. This is to encourage those who feel that they are qualified to apply.
The idea is to give an organisation a wide choice of candidates so that it can get the most qualified to fill posts. For “outsiders” who want to have a career in public service, this system gives them an opportunity to show why they should be considered. So, it is not surprising to see successful business executives or well-known academicians switching careers to serve in public service organisations.
Malaysia should move towards this system of candidate selection to fill top positions in the government. For example, if a secretary-general of another ministry or a head of a government department feels that he is qualified to be the next Finance Ministry secretary-general, he can apply to KSN. Applications can also come from government-linked corporations or the private sector.
This is meritocracy, which a report by the National Economic Advisory Council (NEAC) stresses should be the way forward for the civil service in vetting ministerial proposals before they reach the cabinet. This function is sadly missing in the civil service, resulting in many policy recalls and reversals when they are criticised by the public and challenged by experts for being unrealistic and impractical.
Such hiccups in implementation are not only embarrassing to the leadership, but are an indictment of the professionalism of the civil service, particularly the Diplomatic and Administrative Service (PTD).
Its lack of professional skills and keenness for economics and finance is often the cause of its ineffectiveness. PTD should reinvent itself by recruiting experts from the private sector and research institutions, who can analyse difficult situations.
The NEAC report has made good recommendations for raising the level of leadership in the civil service. One is the revival of the National Development Planning Committee (NDPC), which oversees the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) in the Prime Minister’s Department. NDPC, whose members comprise the most senior civil servants, used to be a powerful body for interagency deliberation and coordination on macroeconomic issues, as well as for reviewing project proposals by EPU. After the officials reach a consensus in NDPC, the proposals go up for political decision-making in the cabinet sub-committee, the National Economic Council (NEC), before reaching the cabinet.
NDPC and NEC were created at the time when EPU was established in 1960 to lead the nation’s development-planning. EPU served as the secretariat and provided
professional input to both committees in collaboration with other central agencies. This three-tier planning system was part of the checks and balances on matters affecting the economy and country’s financial management.
The other recommendation is the strengthening of the Public Services Commission (PSC) and turning it into a highly professional institution for managing human resources in the public service. It is recommended that PSC members be appointed from among highly qualified professionals in the public and private sectors, with a mandate that the commission is independent in its function, as envisaged in the Constitution.
Over the years, its independence has been eroded and its function limited to the routine recruitment and confirmation of officers at the lower levels. The government should restore the constitutional status of PSC and give it independent powers to vet the highest civil service appointments before it decides on who should be KSN and secretaries-general. An independent PSC vetting top appointments will give those holding such posts more legitimacy in the eyes the public.
Tan Sri Mohd Sheriff Kassim, Kuala Lumpur