DistantNews
Support us
🇳🇵 Nepal /Elections & Politics

Goal should be to depoliticise employee selection process

From Kathmandu Post · () English

Summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.

At a glance

News Named sources Context piece
  • The Nepali government's recent ordinances have led to a purge of political appointees in public institutions, sparking concerns about bureaucracy's independence and competence.
  • The controversy over the Chief Justice recommendation, where a lower-ranked justice was chosen over senior ones, intensifies questions about the shift towards a performance-based system versus political patronage.
  • Experts like former Home Secretary Umesh Mainali warn against weakening meritocracy and institutional autonomy, emphasizing the need for objective performance metrics and accountability to prevent Nepal's bureaucracy from becoming a spoils system.

The Balendra Shah administration's recent wave of ordinances, aimed at clearing out political appointees from public institutions, has ignited a critical debate within Nepal regarding the future of its bureaucracy. While the stated intention is to foster a more independent and competent civil service, the move has raised significant concerns about the potential for replacing one form of political patronage with another, particularly in light of the controversial recommendation for the new Chief Justice.

The recommendation of a justice ranked fourth in seniority for the position of Chief Justice has naturally sparked controversy. In institutions like the Nepali Army and the Judiciary, seniority has traditionally been a sacrosanct principle. Adhering to it usually minimises controversy.

· Umesh MainaliCommenting on the controversial recommendation for Chief Justice.

Umesh Mainali, a former Home Secretary and Public Service Commission chair, voices apprehension about the erosion of institutional autonomy and the potential paralysis of key state bodies if meritocratic principles are not rigorously strengthened. The selection of a fourth-ranked justice for the Chief Justice position, bypassing more senior candidates, exemplifies the tension between traditional norms of seniority and the government's stated emphasis on 'performance.' Mainali stresses that if performance is to be the benchmark, objective indicators must be established for all appointments, not just select cases.

If ‘performance’ is to be the primary metric, then the government must establish objective indicators for all appointments, not just select ones.

· Umesh MainaliAdvocating for objective criteria in government appointments.

Mainali's analogy of a carpenter and a chair—where the finished product belongs to the owner, not the maker—aptly illustrates the principle of accountability. Justices and bureaucrats must serve the office they hold, not their past political affiliations. The true test of impartiality, he argues, lies in both internal (organizational) and external (public) perceptions. While the government champions this as a performance-based shift, breaking established traditions without clear, transparent systems invites skepticism and risks undermining the morale and effectiveness of Nepal's civil service, potentially turning it into a system driven by partisan loyalty rather than public service.

A justice or a bureaucrat must be accountable only to the ‘chair’ or the office they hold, not their past affiliations.

· Umesh MainaliEmphasizing accountability and impartiality in public service.
About this summary

Originally published by Kathmandu Post. Summarized and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.

More Stories

From Our Blog