The Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration today welcomed the Public Service Commission’s (PSC) efforts to provide clarity on the participation of public servants in political party study groups and stressed that the guidance must be supported by monitoring and clear institutional controls.
The committee has been vocal in emphasising that legitimate interaction between political leadership and the administration must not blur the constitutional requirement for a professional and impartial public service. The PSC on Wednesday briefed the committee on its Advisory Note on the Participation of Public Servants in Political Party “Study Groups” and Related Informal Engagements. The Commission also presented its Good Practice Guide on Executive Recruitment in the Public Sector and the Use of Technical Experts.
The PSC told the committee that political parties may lawfully maintain internal caucuses and study groups for political and parliamentary coordination. Its concern, however, arises where public servants participate in informal party-political structures discussing official government business outside formal governmental or parliamentary processes. The Commission told the committee that there is no constitutional or legislative prescript authorising such participation outside formal processes.
The committee noted the important distinction the Commission draws between inappropriate political-party engagement and legitimate interaction between political leaders and officials. The PSC recognises that interaction between political leadership and the administration is necessary and constitutionally contemplated, provided it takes place through authorised, transparent and accountable structures.
The committee Chairperson, Mr Jan de Villiers, said the issue is not whether political parties are entitled to establish internal study groups, “but it is clear from the published PSC note that public service members must not attend these meetings as they compromise the objectivity, professionalism and apolitical nature of public service members as envisaged in section 195 of the Constitution.”
Mr de Villiers said this distinction is particularly important because public servants must be able to provide professional and technical advice to political office-bearers without becoming politically aligned. He also highlighted an additional risk – the possibility of political pressure or intimidation associated with officials attending partisan political forums. He cautioned that an official attending a partisan political meeting could be exposed to subtle or overt pressure arising from the influence political office-bearers may have over that official’s career. Even where no such pressure is applied, institutional arrangements should avoid placing professional officials in a position where that risk can arise, the Chairperson said.
The PSC identified several governance risks, including the erosion of administrative impartiality, real or perceived political bias, unequal access to government information and the undermining of multiparty parliamentary oversight. The Commission emphasised that even where improper conduct cannot be established, the perception of political alignment can itself damage confidence in the integrity of public administration.
Committee members welcomed the clarity provided but had questions relating to implementation of the Advisory Note and sought more detail on how compliance will be monitored. They also wanted to know whether the PSC has assessed any study-group engagements since issuing the Advisory Note and what consequences will follow in cases of non-compliance. Another concern related to how lower-ranking officials will be protected if instructed by senior officials or executive authorities to attend inappropriate engagements and how directors-general and heads of department will be held accountable for managing the political–administrative interface. Several committee members were also interested in how this will work in an environment of coalition and multiparty government, and how departments can distinguish legitimate multiparty executive engagement from informal partisan political activity.
The committee stressed that monitoring of compliance will be important in determining whether the Advisory Note produces meaningful changes in practice. The PSC informed the committee that it intends to continue assessing risks at the political–administrative interface through departmental engagements, targeted assessments, risk-based sampling, oversight inspections and integrity and ethics monitoring.
Committee members also welcomed the PSC’s Good Practice Guide on Executive Recruitment and its work to establish a pool of independent technical experts to participate in the recruitment of senior executives. The Guide seeks to strengthen executive recruitment processes, promote merit-based appointments and encourage the involvement of independent technical expertise in the assessment of candidates for senior leadership positions.
Mr de Villiers stressed that when departments interfere in recruitment, disregard merit or fail to appoint people capable of doing the work, ordinary South Africans ultimately pay the price through failing public services, with the greatest impact often falling on those who are most dependent on the state. He also encouraged the PSC to explore closer collaboration with the Department of Home Affairs around its digitisation programme and secure identity systems. He noted that stronger digital identification could assist with the verification of applicants and their qualifications as well as help address problems such as ghost employees.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: The Parliament.
