Issues in civil service directorate tenure system

This question came up due to the non-adherence to extant rules in appointments and promotions as it concerns the directorate cadre in the civil service and associated irregularities in the service’s tenure system.It is noteworthy that the service was a key component in the country’s independence in 1960 and various systems of government adopted over […]

This question came up due to the non-adherence to extant rules in appointments and promotions as it concerns the directorate cadre in the civil service and associated irregularities in the service’s tenure system.
It is noteworthy that the service was a key component in the country’s independence in 1960 and various systems of government adopted over her 55 year history. The service had helped in fashioning out and implementing public policies that have seen the growth of the country’s infrastructure, legal administration and social systems.
Unfortunately, despite efforts aimed at reforming the Nigerian Civil Service to attain the vision of its founders and make it more efficient and responsive to the public, the service continues to stumble under the web of outdated bureaucracy.  
One of these remarkable steps aimed at removing the ossifying factors in the civil service was initiated in August, 2009 by then Head of Civil Service of the Federation (HOCSF) Stephen Oronsaye. Part of the reforms was the eight year tenure system for permanent secretaries and directors in the ministries.
After Oronsaye’s retirement in November 2010 at the statutory retirement age of 60, his successor, Professor Oladapo Afolabi sustained the reforms and moved further by introducing automated system in the overall civil service administration particularly, in pension claims verification.
However, the tenure system for directorate cadre of the service-a policy expected to open up the space for career progression of serving officers in the directorate cadre which ought to be supported by the Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC), which has the mandate for appointments, transfers, promotions and discipline of staff-has become subject to alleged violations.
Presently, aggrieved deputy directors (Administration), who took part in the 2014 promotion examinations that will elevate them to the post of directors, are complaining about the irregularities in the exercise. According to them, out of 169 civil servants who took part in the examinations, only 23 persons were initially selected by the FCSC which hinged its decision on lack of vacancy. Following their protests, 10 additional names were added to the list.
This additional list has raised further questions. Key in this is the suspicion that more persons than the two available lists might have actually passed the exams but were being deliberately shut out. There is also the allegations that appointments are not merit-based as several officers in more junior cadres of service have been transferred from states to usurp available positions of directors that otherwise would have been occupied by the qualified deputy directors.
The tenure system as envisaged by Oronsaye and then Chairman of the FCSC Ahmed Al-Ghazali entails that directors and permanent secretaries in the civil service will spend eight years on their posts before retiring statutorily if they are not caught up by age or length of service.  The tenure policy was primarily aimed at removing stagnation, low morale, low productivity and lack of professionalism from the service.
The senior officers in this cadre-that is level 16 to 17 are to benefit in this new policy if they fulfill the following conditions: they have no disciplinary cases pending against them in the four years before they are due as contained in their Annual Performance Evaluation Report (APER Form), participating in a written and oral examination with a score of at least 60 per cent.
However, with only 33 officers selected by the FCSC in the 2014 promotion examinations, 136 others are left out without the benefit of knowing their fate. Some of them allege that plans are afoot to make them re-write the very ‘painful’ rigorous tests with 150 new deputy directors who would be due for the examination in 2015.
“It will be a waste of resources and time to make us re-write the examinations after we have fulfilled all the conditions and scored above 60 per cent in the written and oral examinations. We deserve to be given our promotions because there are enough vacancies. Alternatively, the authorities should warehouse us or keep a pool of successful deputy directors who would assume the post of director whenever there is vacancy,” said one of the aggrieved officers who pleaded anonymity.
“Let the new administration in the country look into the rot in the civil service which has resulted in demoralization and poor service delivery in the service,” said another aggrieved officer. “For instance, the leadership training for levels 15 to 17; and the Smart-T programme for level 8 to10 and 14 to 16 respectively,                             has not been conducted. There is also the situation where inexperienced persons are brought in to head more experienced persons either through waivers or transfers. This is why the service keeps degenerating.”
Efforts, which have been made to address the issues through proper channels, have so far yielded no results. For instance, on November 3, 2014, the aggrieved civil servants petitioned the HOCSF appealing for promotion having scored the required ‘above 60 per cent.’ Another letter was on December 1, 2014 forwarded to President Goodluck Jonathan through the HOCSF. The letter was acknowledged by the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President.
The aggrieved deputy directors appealed for presidential intervention, explaining that “if this trend continues in a civil service that is aspiring to be a world class civil service, a good number of hardworking and efficient officers will be demoralized and frustrated out of the service.”
“In conclusion Your Excellency, we respectfully request that you kindly prevail on the Federal Civil Service Commission and the office of the Head of Service of the Federation to promote all the deputy directors (Admin.) who scored 60 per cent and above in the 2014 promotion examination to the post of director (Admin.) in deference to the commission’s Guidelines on Appointment, Promotion and Discipline, equity, and fairness, which are hallmarks of your administration’s policy,” the letter read.
Consequently, the presidency was said to have directed the HOCSF and the FCSC to amicably resolve the impasse as it concerns the promotion of the affected officers. But nothing appears to have been done about the situation.
The affected officers believe that having exhausted all administrative mechanism for redress, a legal process could bring succor to them.
“In 2002, some deputy directors (Admin) who were denied promotion on grounds of lack of vacancy went to court to seek redress and they won the case against the federal government, and they were subsequently promoted with all their arrears of promotion fully paid,” they stated in the letter.
In a reply to the president over the issue in December, 2014, the chairman of the FCSC, Deaconess Joan Ayo explained that although more officers than the actual number promoted passed the exams, the situation is due to lack of vacancy. She said it is the duty of the office of the HOCSF to declare vacancies that would accommodate these officers.
But the aggrieved officers do not agree with this position, which they see as an alibi to keep denying them of their due promotion and make them to re-write the same examinations they had already passed.