News
Independence of the Public Service and the case of Devanee Jayathilaka
View(s):
At a discussion that took place, presumably at the Minister’s office, Devanee Jayathilaka clearly explained to State Minister Sanath Nishantha the implications for the environment and the laws that stood in the way of implementing a decision to build a playground on a bio-diversity rich island off Negombo.
The Minister himself seemed to give the official a hearing but the challenge that came the Government official’s way was from people supporting the construction of a playground who were not persuaded by her arguments.
The Officer went on to explain the need to protect the country’s meagre forest cover. She also pointed out that the Gampaha District (within which the land earmarked was located) had the least forest cover (1.6 percent) in the entire country. The removal of rich mangroves along with forests could result in other repercussions including the depletion of oxygen in the atmosphere which elicited a response “we do not need oxygen” from the audience.
The Minister’s response was that Sri Lanka was a small island and with the different laws relating to Forest Conservation, Wildlife Protection and Coast Conservation being invoked there would be no place for people to live. He therefore urged the Forest Officer to be more flexible and arrive at a middle ground.
Citing more statistics relating to the environmental concerns of the Gampaha region the Forest Officer stood her ground and raised a pertinent question: Do we take a scientific decision or do we do as the villagers’ want.
Clearly a woman with a conscience and committed to doing her duty which included drawing the attention of her superiors to the legal framework that has to govern any development work. More strength to her elbow and those of her ilk.
Fortunately the courage shown by the Forest Officer in the face of strong opposition, surprisingly not from the Minister, but from some people of the area, was revealed to the public by the media who were present. What is important however is the answer to the question as to what happens next. Will the Minister ignore and overrule what the Forest Officer stated and proceed to set up the playground, notwithstanding the environmental concerns highlighted by Devanee Jayathilaka, and if so what are the consequences.
There is a responsibility cast on the media to monitor developments to see what happens to the issue of constructing a playground as well as to ensure that Devanee Jayathilaka is not victimised for speaking out. The public will watch with avid interest how things play out.
One course of action available to the Officer is to make a minute in the relevant file that she has drawn the attention of the Minister to the environmental concerns that may arise if the playground project is proceeded with together with a list of such concerns. This will ensure that there is a record of the official concerned having carried out her duties by forewarning the Minister with regard to the environmental damage that may be caused.
In fact this is a course of action that should be resorted to by all public officers. In the event of orders or directions being given to them which militate against the rules and regulations that govern the subject matter, provision must be made to enable such officers to record their reservations regarding such action contemporaneously in the relevant file.
This will not only protect the officer concerned in the event they are charged in the future for what they did or did not do but also restrain any politician or superior officer from carrying out or compelling a subordinate officer to carry out any act which is not sanctioned by the law.
There may be other officers too who advice their Superiors with regard to what is possible and what is not but whose advice is not heeded. Thus there is a strong need to ensure that the Officer concerned is given the right to contemporaneously record their own observations on the matter.
In the field of Governance there is often the cry that archaic ARs (Administrative Regulations ) and FRs ( Financial Regulations) should not stand in the way of reaching the goal of achieving what is best for the people. This is a classic situation where such a cry can be invoked when there are two laudable but competing interests (a playground for children and the Environmental Laws ). However one has to proceed with caution when taking a final decision on the matter and only after a 360 degree assessment is done.
The fact that a Parliamentary Election is around the corner cannot result in political imperatives being given priority over what is in the National Interest.
The Forest Officer’s conduct has been lauded and hailed by various sections of the Government including the Environment Minister S. M. Chandrasena. Some of them even go to the extent of claiming the credit stating that it is the Government that has given public officials the independence to act in such a manner.
Parliamentarian Vijithamuni Soyza however has a different take on this. He has stated that it is the culture of freedom introduced by the Yahapalana Government that have empowered public servants like Devanee Jayathilaka to act without fear.
When one recalls the pre-2015 period when a public official was tied to a tree by Minister Dr. Mervyn Silva for not turning up for a dengue eradication programme without a whimper of protest nor any action against the Minister by the Government, it is evident that Opposition Parliamentarian Vijithamuni’s views are more in keeping with the truth.
In fact on that occasion too it was only a bystander woman who protested at the actions of the Minister. It is undoubtedly the changes introduced after 2015 that have enabled public servants to act independently and without fear or favour. From a National perspective it is important that this independence is further strengthened and built upon. (javidyusuf@gmail.com)