If anyone in a high government position chooses a competent relative, friend or colleague to do a job for them, should we consider the choice an example of nepotism? The question continues to generate reactions following a complaint by a reader alleging that in one department all the important positions are occupied by people chosen for the job because of their family and tribal affiliation.
Personally, I see no harm in an official’s choosing a family member, friend or colleague to do a job — provided the person is qualified and competent to do the job and as long as the selection took place according to the prescribed procedure in such cases.
Selecting someone for a government job must be carefully done because the selection can not only affect the public interest but also various individual and group concerns. A selection may assume a twisted and complicated life, becoming a subject for national attention and discussion.
Controversy arises when a senior official abuses his authority and acts to further personal interests at the expense of public concerns. But, as we all know, satisfying people’s needs is an unattainable goal. People who occupy public office will always be treated with suspicion; there are always those who will complain if not given what they demand and, if given what they demand, will demand even more. This is human nature and cannot be changed; rather it has to be accepted and lived with.
The reader who made the complaint I mentioned above pointed an accusing finger at a certain department having to do with girls’ education; the accusation was that senior officials in the department select only those applicants who are from the same tribal background. The reader demanded an inquiry into what he called the “state of secrecy” shrouding the work of that particular department.
It is good to see people coming forward and publicly raising issues that have heretofore not been discussed openly. Discovering the truth is something which we all should seek and achieving justice and fairness should also be a priority. At the same time, the question is which of our officials has the moral courage to admit publicly that they have made mistakes and committed injustices? Which of our officials has the moral courage then to undo the mistakes and attempt to right the injustices? This does not mean that things should be left as they are. There must be accountability and monitoring — and not only in this particular case. There should be an overall review of how the education sector is performing.
