With great surprise we were informed today by the media about the intention in principle of the Committee on Institutions of the Parliament to promote the amendment of article 70 of the Constitution, in a way that would allow a public servant to be elected as a Member of Parliament without having to resign from his position, which would wait until he completes his parliamentary term to be able to return to it. If this were to be implemented, it would be an unprecedented undermining of the effort to combat the phenomena of interference and corruption, which the political parties profess to support.
Such an abolition of the incompatibility of the status of MP with that of civil servant would run counter to the constitutional principle of the separation of the administrative function of the State from political power. This separation has been described in many judicial decisions as fundamental and as defining the sphere of competence of political power on the one hand and that of the administration on the other.
More fundamentally, any interference of political power with the administrative function of the State would constitute a huge source of corruption, which is a component of corruption, and at the same time would undermine the citizens' confidence in the State, which is expected to be politically neutral. At a time when Parliament proclaims its intention to identify loopholes in various regulations that create incompatibilities, it would be a huge setback to abolish the most basic incompatibility that the constitutional legislature wisely introduced in 1960.
The political neutrality of the administration is essential, especially for the administrations of Ministries and Departments, and even more so for independent Services such as the Audit Service, the Legal Service, the Offices of the various Comptrollers and Commissioners, etc.
Apart from the above serious issues of principle, issues of functionality also arise. Would a post of a Director-General, or a Head of Department or any other officer in a key post in the civil service, remain vacant for 5, 10 or 15 years until the holder decides to return to it?
In essence, such an arrangement would give the impression that the State considers that the posts in the civil service belong ("are back-breaking") to the persons holding them. That approach would be unacceptable. The persons holding public office are servants of the State and not vice versa.
Given that all senior positions in the civil service (above A13) are open to all citizens, any Member of Parliament who believes after his or her term of office that he or she could make a contribution from such a position may well apply for it on an equal footing with all other citizens.
Political parties are cells of democracy and have an extremely important task to perform in ensuring the democratic functioning of the State. But they ought to stay away from the administrative functioning of the State.
We therefore call upon the political parties to have second thoughts and abandon any intention to amend Article 70 of the Constitution.
(MB)
Contents of this article including associated images are owned by PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
