Politicians v/s Bureaucrats - a comparison

Students often ask me who is more powerful - a politician, or a bureaucrat? The answer can be quite nuanced, and detailed.

Compare!

First, the basic definitions. 

A politician is one who represents her/his people, and makes the primary decisions on matters that decide the mode of assets/resources distribution & sharing. In rare instances, she/he may decide on life-and-death matters too (warfare/ terror/ abortion/ religion/ health etc.)

A bureaucrat is one who brings broad or narrow sectoral expertise and administrative acumen to help the politician achieve the goals the policies have set. She/he is not required to earn public approval, and is more permanent in that sense. For the purpose of this answer, I'll include all types of civil services under this definition. Also, my answer is not restricted to just India.

Let's begin listing the powers and limitations -

Ambedkar, the lawmaker

1. Laws: A politician makes the laws. A bureaucrat implements them through drafting of micro rules, regulations and by running the implementation machinery. Together, they become the sarkaar.
2. Sanction: A politician earns public approval through elections. A bureaucrat earns his position through a process of examination.
3. Harmony: Due to point 2, a politician can harmonise mutually antagonistic perceptions of various communities. A bureaucrat will never be in a position to do so.
4. Visible Power: A politician can muster up public support to protest government actions, or bureaucratic apathy, inaction or opposition. A bureaucrat can seek legal/systemic redressal only, and not hit the street to voice grievances.
5. Entrepreneurship: A politician can run a business empire in parallel, either clandestinely or openly (as long as he/she can prove an arm's length connection). A bureaucrat automatically earns disqualification if he turns a commercial entrepreneur.
6. Stability: A politician rides a lion all through his career. A bureaucrat walks the concrete road of system and processes.

   

   Iron Ladies - Margaret & Indira

7. Scope: A politician can transform the entire selection process of bureaucrats. A bureaucrat can significantly delay or sabotage the politician's desire to do so, by apathy, inaction or complexification.
8. Limits: Due to society's general inertia, a cunning and immoral politician almost exclusively reserves the right to indulge in abusive verbiage, harassment and criminal activities. A bureaucrat will have to be extremely stealthy about it!
9. Grandiloquence: A politician can massage his ego regularly by making grandiose statements like - "an investment of Rs 1 lac crore will soon be made to achieve world class output in X sector". A bureaucrat cannot say anything like this ever unless formally sanctioned by the government after policy making.
10. Stamina: A politician runs the gauntlet frequently, and has to face abusive crowds, heat and dust of the land, and rough and tumble of political conspiracies. It requires the skin of a pachyderm to endure and succeed. A bureaucrat can stay aloof, dedicated, quiet and still achieve a lot.
11. One up: A politician can transfer a bureaucrat. A bureaucrat can arrest / prosecute a politician.
12. Leeway: A politician can make loose interpretations of the law. A bureaucrat can make subjective interpretations of the politician's directives.
13. Money: A politician can make a lot of money, without being perceived as being dishonest. An honest bureaucrat cannot.

    

    Pandit Nehru

14. Transformation: A single politician can transform a nation completely. Examples - Pt. Nehru (India), Deng Xiaoping (PRC), Mikhail Gorbachev (USSR), General Zia ul Haq (Pakistan), Nelson Mandela (S Africa), Abraham Lincoln (USA). A single bureaucrat just cannot. The reverse is equally true - a single evil politician with determination can totally destroy his people, and entire bureaucracy may be unable to do anything about it.
15. Enablers: A politician can create an enabling environment for bureaucrats to deliver. Example - PM Shri Narendra Modi. A determined bureaucrat can transform a single system to enable long term political stability. Example - Ex Chief Election Commissioner Shri T N Seshan (IAS) who radically improved Indian electoral processes.
16. Intersection: A politician can, in certain situations, act like a true bureaucrat. Example - the Constituent Assembly that drafted the nitty-gri
    tty of the elaborate Indian constitution. A bureaucrat can, in certain situations, control the raging fires of separatism. Example - IPS officer J F Ribiero in Punjab during the insurgency.
17. Crossing over: A politician cannot usually crossover to become a bureaucrat. Many bureaucrats become politicians. Examples - Ajit Jogi (ex IAS), Arvind Kejriwal (ex IRS), Kiran Bedi (ex IPS).

    

    Arvind Kejriwal (IRS), Kiran Bedi (IPS) 

18. Losing their sleep: A politician loses sleep when public support wanes. A bureaucrat may lose sleep when political support wanes!
19. Transparency: A politician can subject everyone else, except himself, to public scrutiny. A bureaucrat can do nothing about it. Example - the RTI Act in India, which presently exempts political parties from scrutiny
20. Peace of mind: Whomsoever you may be, this surely has to be earned!

Hope this helped!

Promo:
For excellent educational services, check these out:
All Courses  www.pteducation.com/Courses
For IIM-CAT Prep   http://www.pteducation.com/mba.aspx
For UPSC Prep http://www.pteducation.com/upsc.aspx

~

Politicians versus Civil Servants

A lot of students often wonder, who is more powerful - a politician or a civil servant?

Put crudely - "a CM or an IAS officer?"

This question is similar to the following:

Yes Minister!

1. Who is more powerful in a company - the CEO or the Departmental Heads?
2. Who is more powerful in an army - the Supreme Commander or the Field Generals?
3. Who is more powerful in a Political Party - the President or the District Heads?

In all these cases, to the uninitiated, the answer is clear - the first guy mentioned.

But to a more mature eye, the power of the 'first' depends so intimately on the workings of the second. Will a CEO be effective without proper execution by the various departmental heads (of, say, Finance, HR, Marketing, Production etc.)? Will the Supreme Commander of an Army be any good without the bravery and tactical brilliance of the field generals? Can the President of a political party alone drive home electoral victories without the involvement of other members?

As is clear, the top guy in an organisation depends on the web of relationships that flow from him, under him and through him. He/she can set the tone and the flow, but the ultimate execution depends on a whole host of factors, including involvement of everyone else.

Indian democracy stands on the three pillars name the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. There is mutual support, and checks-and-balances among them to ensure that no single entity becomes all-powerful. Further, since the Constitution explicitly vests certain powers in the services, no one can take them away (except through a long & complicated process).

If the officer is honest, and wants no special favours from the political bosses, there is virtually nothing that can stop him/her from carrying out the mandated duties.

Few points to consider:

Political Executive with Administrative Executive

1. Politicians come and go. But civil servants are permanent.
2. A chief minister can be removed anytime by the Central Command of the party. But a civil servant can only be transferred between locations or posts.
3. The Chief Minister can carry out a major shuffling of administrative machinery from time to time, but even for that, she/he has to depend on the Chief Secretary (an IAS officer).
4. The Union Cabinet headed by the PM and made up of various Ministers can take major decisions, but the execution and 'filling-up-of-legal-requirements' depends on the Cabinet Secretary (an IAS officer).
5. Unfortunately, when it comes to corruption, dishonest individuals in both profiles can outdo each other!

It is all about a balance ultimately.
~