For last couple of months all the major national dailies published series of reports about the alleged corruption of the Chairman, members, and officials of the Public Service Commission. The newspaper reports unearthed how the questions of preliminary and written examinations were leaked, how candidates were asked irrelevant questions in the viva voce, and how marks were tampered.

We were taken aback when we discovered that there were syndicates in the Public Service Commission composing of members, officials and brokers who confirmed the selection of many candidates in lieu of money. This is sufficient to totter the edifice of civil bureaucracy in Bangladesh.

I humbly request the policy makers to ponder over two things. One, the teachers of the public universities are conducting the admission tests of the universities and the same teachers, when working in the PSC, are conducting the examinations of BCS. The fairness and credibility of public university admission tests are well-accepted, whereas procedural transparency, propriety, and public confidence of BCS examinations have dropped to the sediment. Second, a comparative study of the recruitment procedure of military officers and civil bureaucrats will reveal how the civil bureaucracy has been tainted at the very outset.

The Advisers of the caretaker government have considered the constitutional and administrative issues involved in the BCS examinations and humane aspects of the selected candidates. The grounds, put forward by the government side for canceling the viva voce, were stated in a government handout. The handout said that "The meeting (of Advisers) took the decision after reviewing newspaper reports and various allegations about 27th BCS examination in order to restore confidence in public mind and establish transparency in the recruiting process for public jobs." (The Daily Star, May 30, 2007.)

The government decision has accepted the fact that there were gross irregularities in the BCS examination procedure, which has cast serious doubt in public mind about the individual credibility of the Chairman and members of the PSC and institutional sanctity of the Public Service Commission. If the government admitted irregularities which obliged them to restore confidence in public mind and establish transparency in the recruiting process, why did they cancel the 27th BCS examinations results partially? Is it judicious to redress any injustice in part? If the government would cancel the full results of the 27th BCS examinations, would not it deter the future incumbents from committing this type of vices?

The government decision also contains a fallacy as it remains silent about the punishment of those who were responsible for the alleged irregularities. Civil society members several times have raised their voice to form the Supreme Judicial Council to inquire into the reported irregularities and corruption of the ex-chairman, members, and officials of the PSC and accordingly penalise them, if they are found guilty. The government admits the commission of irregularities and cancels the viva voce on that ground, but keeps the responsible persons beyond the ambit of justice. In no way this type of contradiction stands in tune with the crusade of the caretaker government against corruption.

I do not deny the fact that there are candidates who have been selected on merit and who do not have their age to attend another BCS examination. Their cases need to be considered discreetly.

The irregularities, anomalies, and sheer corruption in the BCS examinations procedure and recent government decision to cancel the viva voce have underlined the necessity to recast the Public Service Commission. The appointment procedure of the Chairman and Members of the PSC, the way BCS examinations are conducted, the quota system, the eligibility and competence of the PSC officials must be brought within the ambit of scrutiny immediately. The members and officials, who were involved in the irregularities, if not replaced by neutral and competent persons, the coming viva-voce will be a mockery.

The editorial of the Daily Star on June 1, 2007 very correctly remarked that, "It is for the new Chairman now to set the right tenor at the PSC through the clearly hands-on leadership he has been demonstrating since taking charge. That obviously calls for the creation of a right, purposeful team which can take the organisation back to its moorings."

I want to draw, in the present context, the attention of the policy-makers, civil society members and commoners to consider the reconstruction of PSC as one of the most important agenda of the state. The civil bureaucracy constitutes the skeleton of a democratic state, spread over the whole country, from city to the remote villages.

The civil bureaucracy in Bangladesh is beset with many problems. The civil servants are not sufficiently sensitised and committed to ensure the interest of the tax payers. But if we want to establish a pro-people civil bureaucracy, the first task of the caretaker government is to form a high-powered Commission consisting of Supreme-Court judges, academicians, bureaucrats, doctors and engineers to look into the constitutional, administrative, and procedural flaws of the PSC and civil bureaucracy in Bangladesh. It will submit extensive recommendations which will include, inter alia, the amendment of the Constitution and enactment of new laws to ensure recruitment of competent, committed and honest candidates in the service of the Republic and to make the civil bureaucracy very dynamic.

In a globalised world the civil bureaucracy has to execute the state policies, which include -- ensuring basic rights of citizens, reaching state facilities to the toiling masses, constructing infrastructure for agricultural and industrial development, keeping the country connected with the international community and even playing the regulatory role in communicating with the super highway of information and technology.

Without an efficient and committed civil bureaucracy how Bangladesh can expect to cope with the current of 21st century? Civil bureaucracy of many developed countries, like USA, UK, France, New Zealand, India, have undergone many reforms. Why should we lag behind?

Sheikh Hafizur Rahman Karzon is an Assistant Professor, Department of Law, University of Dhaka.