On Political Appointments To Universities

By Janaki Jayawardena –APRIL 28, 2022

Janaki Jayawardena

The context

There are two main reasons for me to write this article as an eye opener for the public: Firstly, for more than a month I have been participating in a silent protest on the road in my area with a group of people who demand a just and accountable rule in this country. I have observed how some very elderly citizens who have never thought of getting onto the road to protest are making long journeys from surrounding areas and are standing an hour or more demanding a system change that has been needed in this country for a long time. I feel that their labour and efforts should be highlighted here. Secondly, it was reported in several newspapers that the recent appointment of the Vice Chancellor to the University of Colombo indicates a political bias and that some Council Members of the University of Colombo have resigned due to injustice apparent in the appointment. Furthermore, the present Vice chancellor of the university of Colombo said there was a manipulation in the process of awarding marks to the applicants and thereby the awarded marks do not reflect honesty and justice.

Many have interpreted the crisis we go through presently as a ‘dollar crisis’ but it is very clear to whoever is interested in understanding the present crisis that it is not merely economic but a crisis of post-colonial state building in Sri Lanka. Even though the 1972 Constitution was adopted to do away with colonialism and create a Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, equity and justice has been violated in Sri Lanka by inbreeding parochialism in the state-making process. One very good example of this is political manipulations in the appointments of public officers to administrative service in order to serve and safeguard political regimes. Until 1972 administrative officers were appointed to State administrative positions by the Public Service Commission through a rigorous process based on merits. The 1972 Constitution has given this responsibility to Cabinet Ministers.  Since then, however, sympathy to the elected regime has become the implicit criteria, and as a consequence, appointments to the public service have become highly politicised. Instead of being based on merit, servitude to the political parties and politicians are much more important than the qualifications and experience in the service.

On appointments to bureaucracy Krause et.al says

“Governance in a democratic society is premised on the simple notion that the citizenry can effectively control their government. Responsiveness to the broader polity, however, requires that government exhibit competence in the tasks it is delegated to perform. While elected officials seek responsiveness from the bureaucracy, a government that is ineffective at executing policy cannot be responsive to the broader polity. This tension between political responsiveness and bureaucratic independence governs the selection of unelected officials to fill government positions. The selection methods used for staffing unelected posts provide direct insight into how elected officials weigh their desire of minimizing agency problems arising from delegated authority with their need to provide bureaucracies sufficient slack to effectively perform tasks. (2006, online :01)

In Sri Lanka what we are experiencing is the opposite. The grip of the politicians on the civil administrative service is so tight that recently the excessive militarization of public administration became a norm by the appointment of retired military personnel (often without the required knowledge or experience) to key positions. The public service has become ineffective and lethargic in many aspects due to this and the nepotism and corruption that is rampant in the public service of this country. Even though Sri Lanka’s universities are semi-government institutions, in order to maintain academic freedom, the selection of the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor has increasingly suffered the same fate as in other public service institutions. The most recent examples are the appointment of the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor to the University of Colombo.

Appointing a Chancellor

According to Part VI, Article 32 of the University Act, “The President shall nominate the Chancellor of each University. The Chancellor shall be the Head of the University, hold office for a period of five years reckoned from the date of his nomination, and shall, preside at any Convocation of the University” (The Chancellor. [S 32, 7 of 1985].

According to this provision, the appointment of a Chancellor is solely dependent on the President of Sri Lanka. Even though the term is for five years some Chancellors have served longer than five years. However, hitherto the Chancellors were appointed based on their academic excellence, merits, and national service. The recent appointment of the Chancellor to the University of Colombo by the President overlooked all these. His loyalty to the regime and appeasing his criticism of the regime was the eligibility for his appointment. In various press statements the Chancellor himself confirmed that this was a political appointment to silence him and that he was told that his duty is attending the convocation only. When we look at the provision of the University Act, he is correct.

However, when the appointment was challenged by the academic community, and students refused to be awarded degrees by a political monk, the blame was put on the former Vice-Chancellor for “not being able to control” the students. This itself shows the singular lack of understanding of the role of the Vice Chancellor and students in a university. In university students are considered as adults and the Vice Chancellor does not act like a school principal. This incident was used to vilify the former Vice chancellor and to say that she was incompetent. It is very clear that the Chancellor has no proper understanding of the role of a Chancellor in a university. He has offered to donate various items to students and build a hostel if a land is given. These offers amount to bribes to appease students’ criticism.

Read More