Dear Editor,
While our National Assembly is debating the 2020 budget, the issue of the employment of Ms. Desir seems to be centre stage as if it is an element of the budget. In my humble opinion, the Desir matter reflects the petty, politicized, immature and archaic nature of our politics, governance and public administration. Worse than that is the fact that our politicians do no acknowledge the problem and seem prepared to wallow in it to gain cheap political points rather than advance the Nation`s institutional development.
We are in our seventh post-election period, since our touted “return to democracy”, yet we have the recurrence of the same problems. Witch hunting, one such problem, is alleged by the party in opposition, particularly with regime change in 1992, 2015 and now in 2020.
Why haven’t we, over the years, sought to define and enshrine which are political offices that should be vacated once there is regime change? This is the norm in most democracies.
Why haven’t we ensured that all of the jobs in the public sector, which are not defined as political appointments, have unequivocal selection criteria and processes? That is cardinal in any meritocracy.
Why do we refer to termination of contracts as dismissals? In employment law, a dismissal is punitive action which is intended to redress wrong doing or breach of contract. Dismissal is not the mere termination of one`s engagement in keeping with predetermined terms and conditions of the contract, it has negative material consequences.
Why in a country whose constitution guarantees the “just conditions of work” and the facilitation of “engagement of citizens in activities designed to achieve their sustainable livelihoods” do we maintain provisions in our employment contracts that provide for arbitrary termination rather than termination with cause?
Applying all of the above to the Desir case, she would be protected from dismissal under the guise of the invocation of a clause of her contract; or if there are allegations leveled against her, she would be given a hearing and her employment determined based on the out come of the hearing. If per chance her job classified her as a political appointee she would have been obligated to vacate the position.
If we are serious about democracy and good governance, as touted, we have no option but to follow the Best Practices outlined herein rather than to continue down the road of incivility and political bullyism, in the conduct of public affairs.
Yours truly,
Vincent Alexander
