Dear Editor,
The reported declamation of an appointment of a new staff member to GECOM on the basis of the latter’s alleged political sympathies, if not indeed association, unwittingly raises a possible converse: that is the presumption must be that where in recent circumstances in the same organisation, at least two quite substantive appointments did not invite the same reservations, these recruits must have been evaluated as having the right sympathies and even approved political affiliations.
One outstanding example of such approbation must be the ready but unremarked access of the last CEO, GECOM to the Office of the President for employment.
What however is perhaps more pertinent in this instance is the transparency of the recruitment process.
One stands corrected however, if in fact the vacant position of Public Relations Officer was adequately advertised.
But on reflection about the initial issue, it inheres the more fundamental fact that ‘affiliates’ (to coin a word) cannot perform distinctively as professionals, as do the large number of ‘majority’ voters behave in the Public Service, for example.
The remarkable thing about PROs is that the very job neutralizes them. There is little or no scope for sympathy (or antipathy for that matter). They must just deliver what the organisation directs.
That must be apathy!
Yours faithfully,
E.B. John
