Secrecy in governance

Byadmin

Dated

May 7, 2022

Secrecy in governance

M Ali Siddiqi describes a contentious matter

Comment

The recent Secrecy in governance disclosure of misappropriation of Pakistani Tosha-khana practices has once again brought to the fore the crucial issue of determining the contours of governance secrecy vis-à-vis the level of keeping the people informed about governmental actions. The entire issue has also thrown ample light upon the attitude evident in official circles, shared by military/political leaders and preeminent civil servants, to the effect that the citizenry had little business inquiring precisely how the country is governed. It appears that by design, the work of the government, including its delegation of some major responsibilities to select cabinet committees, remains veiled, although the fact of that veiling is now openly recognised. This lacuna is globally challenged but Pakistan is not amongst the governance structures that pay heed to such demands and does nothing more than providing lip service to the essential attribute of transparency in governance.
Successive governments in Pakistan have stubbornly adhered to the view that the confidential aspects of government business remain disproportionately vast and should not be revealed to the people unless the access to public records is secured by the judiciary. This tendency is unfortunately stronger than the voices calling for disclosure of the business of the government. There, however, exists a powerful view that an excessive stifling of information about the process of governance may mislead the public and impair the functioning of government yet the question persists whether in the name of a better informed, more responsive citizenry measures of open government might secure an understanding of what transpires in the corridors of power. It is widely recognised that governance is an evolutionary phenomenon and is powered by the urge to reform and refine it for the betterment of the citizenry.
While a large majority of people despise the secrecy prevalent in governmental functions but they also the question about how and why has secrecy come to envelop the practice of modern governance system particularly in Pakistan. This is quite a valid question and needs to be evaluated in its true perspective with a view to adequately dissect the issue. It must be kept in view that Pakistan inherited the colonial legacy of closed government as the British imperial government was an alien government that ventured to carry out its functions quietly and felt no compulsion to inform the broader people about what they did. The British did inform people whatever they found was required but kept most of the governance affairs confidential. Their difficulty was further confounded by the fact that the British administration was conditioned to take orders from the India Office in London that worked under the control of the British parliament.
The viceregal system of Secrecy in governance, for all intents and purposes, mirrored the British cabinet system though it was not answerable to parliament in India as there did not exist any though the British always tried to keep abreast with public opinion through liaising with representative institutions such as business guilds, municipal bodies and leading social workers. The British cabinet system of governance was also not that advanced as it is now and was geared towards excessive confidentiality. It is a part of governance history that though the British cabinet governance worked on the principle of collective responsibility with minutes and conclusions of cabinet meetings were deliberately prepared objectively and impersonally, designed to record agreement and not promote controversy. It was quite clear that behind many of the decisions lay tensions and influences which were not reflected in the official records.
Accordingly, the Secrecy in governance of British Indian government issued tightly defined institutional account of the secretariat that were very brief and hardly gave away much. It was however observed that such an approach is perforce limited because the governance itself did not evolve in accord with abstract principles of governmental performance as the British government was shaped by political considerations and personal forces but this was not the case with the colonial government. The issue of observing strict secrecy was exacerbated in Indian administration because of concerns of foreign and imperial policy that occasionally intruded keeping in view the fact that the British ran a minority show. They were therefore constrained to keep a tight lid on governance matters.
In assessing these constraints one has to acknowledge the preponderant departmentalism of the governance machinery giving way to the fitful and erratic political leadership that took over from the British Empire. Even the British governance perceptions suffered from the conflict between precepts of open and closed government that Pakistani governance system inherited. The Pakistani leadership was hard-pressed to tackle issues that had exhausted the British governance machinery before handing over power to the new rulers. Keeping in view the nature of socio-political problems, the new Pakistani leadership soon grew disillusioned with the traditional ways in which the British governed and they were not alone in it as in official circles this dissatisfaction was palpable. The prudence and restraint of the British emerged out of their circumstantial detachment but the Pakistani leadership could not afford to do that. The new leadership started pointing out to inadequacies of the governmental and institutional framework within which Pakistani governance system operated. This attitude revealed anxiety about policy and concern with the mechanism of policy-making and somehow evolved into increase in secrecy of governmental functions.
The malaise of arbitrary decision making had seeped into political precincts almost from the very first months of the inception of Pakistan that witnessed strained relations between civil authorities and the military. Amidst the more-than-frequent change in prime ministers, people with rational understanding of matters kept on insisting that the change of ministry will not bring adequate governance to the country without a change in method. The military rulers of Pakistan always provided good reasons for protecting military secrets from the civilian functionaries of the government that formed the major part of the governance process that was considered to dispose to talk rather than to act and gossip concerning military operations was common fare. They also were sure that security provisions in official circles were lax by any standards compromising the actions of the government. The military rule was essentially tight-lipped about governance affairs providing venues for ambiguity leading to profound distrust in the governance machinery.
The civil bureaucratic structure was alleged to specialise in publicising breaches of governmental secrecy as at times it took the official decisions as public property. The wars faced by Pakistan during military regimes raised fundamental questions about the structure and personnel of the government. The military rulers therefore propagated the need to alter the accustomed machinery of government, a structure to which the parliamentary governance process was deeply attached. In such a conflicting setting, the rulers, both civil and military, looked to a strongly centralised, possibly authoritarian executive as Pakistan’s only escape from ineffective government. The rulers recognised two main defects of the civil governance, the first being that its numbers are too large and that there is delay, evasion, and often obstruction on the part of the government departments in giving effect to its decisions. The outcome was and is that the rulers consider it with good reason that the citizens are kept in ignorance of most of governmental decisions. TW

Read More

M Ali Siddiqi is a writer who contributes to leading periodicals

Share

MOST READ
The writ of international law
The writ of international law
M Ali Siddiqi looks at a crucial...
Resurgence of fascism
Resurgence of fascism
M Ali Siddiqi describes a dangerous...
President Xi Jinping
XI on his way to ruling China for life
M Ali Siddiqi talks about apparent...
Governance and equitable distribution of resources
Governance and equitable distribution of resources
M Ali Siddiqi talks about Governance...
The Need For Pakistan
The Need For Pakistan
M A Siddiqi expresses surprise...
The Presence And Essence Of Pakistaniat
The Presence And Essence Of Pakistaniat
M Ali Siddiqi describes a strong...

Get Newsletters

Career

Subscribe Us