Resignations without giving reasons

We are going through tumultuous times, indeed. The COVID pandemic is the main challenge facing the nation as much as it is to the entire world. The economy is on the verge of bankruptcy, aggravated by the pandemic.

As far as the medical emergency is concerned, advice of the experts in the field, which we are not short of, is indispensable. In fact many countries have entrusted the task of planning the control strategy entirely to the medical and public health professionals. Other government agencies are only responsible for implementing such plans. Likewise, in Sri Lanka, many committees and task forces have been appointed to formulate policies with regard to control measures for the pandemic. Many experts have been deliberating various policy decisions ever since the pandemic began. Unfortunately, we find that in implementing whatever such decisions taken behind closed doors, there are obvious discrepancies. This has been mostly seen in the way the accepted protocol in the rollout of the vaccines has been altered from time to time, to suit unknown beneficiaries. The imposition of restriction of movements, like lockdowns, too have been on dubious grounds and appear to be done with much reluctance. The armed forces appear to have been given an inappropriately prominent role in the control measures. The latest such irregularity is the decision to carry out vaccination of the over 20 age group in Hambantota with a much sought-after brand of vaccine that it is claimed should have been reserved for school- children. Known political affiliations of the area, local politicians appearing to take credit and the A rmy and youth organisations carrying it out with no involvement of the health officials gave the impression that the whole exercise was politically motivated. The Health Ministry officials failed to give a valid explanation as to the process confirming suspicions people had all along.

It is against this background that two eminent medical specialists, one of them the esteemed physician spearheading the curative aspects, resigned from the main COVID control task force. The medical professionals concerned were aware from the very beginning that these and other respected experts in the task forces were unhappy about the way their advice was ignored by the decision-makers. They have indicated their grievances at various discussions in the medical forums about the pandemic. It is generally accepted that we may have so far failed to control the epidemic adequately resulting in avoidable deaths due to these irregularities.

These are the latest in a series of resignations from various committees and task forces dealing with the pandemic. They include leading experts in clinical medicine, public health, and laboratory services like virologists. The resignations cause vacancies which cannot be filled easily and could seriously hamper the pandemic control efforts. If this unhealthy state of affairs is to be rectified, the general public and the civil society activists should be kept informed so that there will be some compulsion on the decision-makers to take corrective action. Otherwise the narrative of the political masters that all decisions are taken strictly according to expert advice goes unchallenged. General assumption that nothing can change the behaviour of those in power is to accept defeat.

Despite much criticism of the honesty of the public servants, we have had a few honourable men and women over the years who have been brave enough to resign their posts when they are unhappy with what goes on in their offices beyond their control, due mostly to political interference. A few that come to my mind in the recent years include a chairperson of the Board of Investments and some other chairmen of state corporations and authorities.

However, it is disappointing to note that in almost all these instances the officers concerned have not been confident enough to give the reasons for resignation, instead just quoting “personal reasons”. Perhaps in order not to embarrass the political masters, they prefer to keep the reasons to themselves thus washing their hands off any controversy. It may also be due to their genuine fears about possible repercussions as many of them remain government employees and such retaliation is known to occur. This aspect of course cannot be taken lightly. Still in the event of any retaliation no doubt all professional organis ations will unite to oppose any such moves. It is encouraging to note that people are ready to challenge all that is undemocratic and irregular done by the authorities.

Yet by keeping the public in the dark about the various problems that do not give them the opportunity to do an honest job of work, they are denying the chance to correct the situation by identifying what went wrong. The whole purpose of such resignations is lost if they are not brave enough to speak out the truth. Such silence would encourage the wrongdoers to gladly continue with their work without any hindrance as their questionable actions remain only as speculation without any confirmation of allegations with first hand information. All professionals and others who know the true facts but chose to remain silent may be considered silent accomplices to wrongdoing. Many commentators in the public media have made even disparaging remarks about this failure, at times giving incorrect interpretations as well.

Hence when responsible officers undertake a task of national importance, it is their public duty to divulge any obstacles that interfere with their functioning leading to their resignation. They can at least release their letters of resignation to the press. Quietly excusing themselves out of an unhappy situation and allowing the harmful state of affairs to continue cannot be condoned.

Dr. Sarath Gamini De Silva