Politicization of Bureaucracy in South Asia: a Comparative Study of Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka

VOLUME 43 NUMBER 1 SJPG JUNE 2020 Politicization of Bureaucracy in South Asia: A Comparative Study of Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka Ahsan Abdullah Abstract Politicization of bureaucracy is a very common phenomenon irrespective of developed and developing countries. Tis problem is acute in South Asian countries like Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc. Te Indian Subcontinent was a British colony for about two hundred years. Te administrative system of South Asian countries was developed over the period and the bureaucracy of South Asia is sustaining British elements till now. Tough the Great Britain has a systematic administrative system, the South Asian countries have not been following the British administrative system properly. British bureaucratic system prioritizes merit in appointment, promotion and in other afairs while politicization of bureaucracy is a great concern in South Asian countries. Tis study is a qualitative research which explores that bureaucracy of Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka, which was once considered as the “steel frame” of the British Empire, is now hanging between professional neutrality and political loyalty. Consequently, the bureaucracy of these countries is becoming inefcient and inefective to provide quality social services to the citizens. Keywords: Bureaucracy, Politicization, British administrative system, Efciency and efectiveness, South Asia. 1. Introduction Bureaucracy is an inseparable part of any government. Te role of bureaucracy in the process of governance is well recognized around the world (Rahman, 2017). It is a pre-requisite for the modernization of every country. It is engaged in nation building activities and providing social services (Panday, 2012). South South Asian Journal of Policy and Governance 25 Asia has a longstanding tradition of bureaucratic organization. It was a colony of Great Britain for about two hundred years. Te administrative system of South Asian countries was developed over the period, especially during the British period. So, most of the South Asian countries share a common history of the development of bureaucracy and is sustaining the traits and culture of colonial bureaucracy (Azizuddin, 2011; Rahman, 2017). However, South Asian countries do not follow the inherited administrative system properly. Politicization of bureaucracy is a very common phenomenon in South Asia. But the intensity of application and reasons for politicization vary from country to country (Panday, 2012). Te intensity might difer but the causes of politicization are very common in South Asian countries like Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka. Most of the successive governments of South Asian countries tried to control the bureaucracy for political reasons. Political principals attempt to exercise control over the bureaucracy where “party loyalty” is one of the most important requirements for getting appointment, posting, promotion and other benefts (Almendares, 2011; Panday, 2012). Because of open politicization the bureaucracy of Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka has lost much of its dynamism and efciency. As a consequence, the civil bureaucracy of these countries has become sluggish and incapable of providing social services efciently (Rahman, 2015). Tis study has explored the nature, causes and consequences of the politicization of bureaucracy in Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka. 2. Methodology of the Study Tis is a qualitative research that has been conducted through the secondary source of data. Secondary data is the data that have been already collected and analyzed by someone and readily available for use (Kothari, 2004). Such data are cheaper and more quickly obtainable than the primary data (Abdullah, 2017). For this study, secondary data and information have been collected mainly from books, journals, articles, reports, newspapers, and internet sources. For the purpose of this study, some theoretical literature have been reviewed. 3. A Brief Conceptual Framework Bureaucracy is the administrative body of appointed ofcials (Prasad et al., 2016). It is an administrative system which is designed to accomplish large-scale administrative tasks by systematically coordinating the work of many individuals (Yourarticlelibrary.com, 2019). According to Max Weber, “bureaucracy is the formal system of organization and administration designed to ensure efciency and efectiveness”. He has given a number of characteristics of bureaucracy. Impersonality or impersonal relationships is one of the important characteristics of bureaucracy. It means the relationships among individuals in ofcial 26 Politicization of Bureaucracy in South Asia positions are governed through the system of ofcial authority and rules. Tis type of relationship is free from personal emotions, nepotism and favoritism. In addition, rational factors govern the decision making process (Tyrocity.com, 2019; Yourarticlelibrary.com, 2019). However, the rejection of impersonality for personal reasons in the functioning of the bureaucracy is meant politicization of bureaucracy (Appiah and Abdulai, 2017). Politicization of bureaucracy is not a new phenomenon. Many developed and most of the developing countries have shown evidence of greater politicization. In a descriptive sense, it is the right of a government to appoint their own people to senior public service positions while the pejorative sense refers to the substitution of political criteria for merit based criteria. Politicization of bureaucracy in most of the developed countries can be explained from the descriptive perspective. But governments of developing countries follow neither the principle of descriptive politicization nor pejorative politicization. Tey consider “party loyalty” as one and only guiding principle for appointment, promotion, posting, transfer etc. in the civil services (Panday, 2012). We can consider two dimensions to analyze the process of politicization of bureaucracy. First one is bureaucratic participation in public policy process. Te politics–administration dichotomy implies that there is a clear distinction between politics and administration, where policy decisions are made by the politicians and bureaucrats are supposed to implement the policy decisions. From this dimension, politicization occurs when the civil servants are vested with the responsibility to carry out political decision, adopt them and explain them. Te second dimension is partisan appointments in the bureaucracy which refers to a situation where appointment, placement, transfer, promotion and other career decisions of civil servants are dependent on the will of their political bosses (Rahman, 2017). From sociological perspective, this dimension can be called social exchange relationship. Social exchange is a type of interaction in which one person voluntarily does something for another with the expectation of reward in return (Shepard and Greene, 2001). Likewise, civil servants are placed, promoted and transferred to the favorable or important positions, expecting carrying out political decisions. Partisan appointment at the key strategic positions of the government is common in many developed countries. It is also constitutionally accepted. ‘Spoil system” in USA allows the partisan appointment at the top positions which is constitutionally accepted and also legitimate. But this scenario is diferent in most of the developing countries like in South Asia. Tere is no constitutional option for the politicization of bureaucracy in most of the South Asian countries. But the governments of South Asian countries try to control South Asian Journal of Policy and Governance 27 the bureaucrats by imposing their political ideology to the bureaucrats afer forming the government (Rahman, 2017). However, high level of politicization decreases the efciency of the bureaucrats or civil servants. To get the efciency of the bureaucrats, the following mechanism should be sustained, a. An efective scheme of Recruitment; b. An efective scheme of Performance Evaluation; c. An efective scheme of Training; d. An efective scheme of motivation of employees (Silva, 2015). Te above mentioned mechanisms cannot function properly due to over politicization in the developing countries. Consequently, civil service of these countries becomes inefcient to play a major role in public service delivery. 4. Politicization of Bureaucracy in South Asia Te roots of administrative structure of South Asian countries (Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and Maldives) lie deep in their history. Te administrative structure of South Asian countries is a legacy of British Indian Civil Service (Ahmed, 1968; Khan, 2013; Rahman, 2017). Its origin can be traced further back to the ancient and medieval period (Khan, 2015). Te Mauryan dynasty (320-185 BC) developed an efcient administrative structure resembling many principles of modern bureaucracy. In the medieval period, the Mughals established the most centralized administration in the history of Indian Subcontinent. Tey came from the Central Asian region and brought with them their past administrative experience. Tey utilized that experience and resulted in having good efect to build and efciently run the vast Indian empire (Khan, 2013). Te coming of British rule brought signifcant changes in the existing administrative structure in Indian subcontinent (Khan, 2009). Te British Indian administration shared many of the salient features of the Mughal administration (Ahmed, 2013). Civil Service in British India has been described from time to time as the

Load more