Diplomatic postings must be earned, not dished out to relatives

By Kilemi Mwiria

It is common practice for Heads of State to appoint those they believe will best represent their countries abroad. In many western countries, such jobs go to the most prominent party supporters.

Kenya’s problem however is that political parties and influential politicians get their relatives and close associates appointed, sometimes in preference over more qualified diplomats. In addition to doubly advantaging a few families, those overlooked become demoralised if those who bypass them are inferior to them in relevant professional, regional and language competencies.

We have also read of cases where diplomats have stayed put in their stations after expiry of their contracts due to political protection.

Politicisation can also lead to costly expansion of diplomatic missions when even richer countries are downsizing their overseas staff to the barest minimum. Moreover, when you leave it to a few individuals to decide who gets these very attractive jobs, some of those recruited become more indebted to the appointer than country, especially where political and other favours are anticipated.

We need to embrace a more inclusive and competitive recruitment system for our diplomatic staff where a professional body or the Public Service Commission hires top and lower level diplomatic staff. For top and sensitive postings, up to three candidates (vetted by Parliament) can be shortlisted for the President/Prime Minster to pick their choice. We are already doing this for public universities (where the President used to appoint vice-chancellors), parastatals and senior civil service jobs, except Permanent Secretaries.

Recruitment of diplomatic staff should also reflect the clamour for equity in resource allocation countrywide. There are those who fear that the distribution of jobs held by more than three hundred Kenyans working as diplomats abroad is skewed in favour of regions from where those who make key recruitment decisions have hailed from over the years. In addition to ambassadorial ones, these jobs include political, commercial, educational and labour attaches, accountants and administrative staff. Women are particularly underrepresented. Out of the 51 top diplomats, only six are women.

As MPS clamour for equity in the allocation of CDF and other resources, they should ask for an audit on the national distribution of diplomatic jobs and insist that future recruitment targets underrepresented parts of Kenya and disadvantaged social groups such as women. In addition to employees, equity is also about other benefits that come with these jobs. They include education support for dependants which gives them an upper hand in terms of international exposure and generous relocation and station allowances, free housing and an average of Sh150,000 monthly salary top up in most western countries. Some diplomats can also favour friends and constituents with relevant trade or educational opportunities.

The principle of equitable representation calls for the establishment of a national employment data bank that is open to public scrutiny and which lists constituencies of key office holders and their qualifications. The data bank should also indicate the relative population strengths of communities. For example, it is not enough to know simply how many Luos, Kalenjins or Kikuyus occupy senior public jobs. It is more useful to know if this number is proportionate to their population.

Such detailed information should forestall the kind of tensions related to unsubstantiated ethnic suspicions of some communities being dominant in public service employment prior to the 2007 General Election.

Regrettably, we do not seem to have made enough progress in putting in place appropriate policies and structures that can promote equitable distribution of senior public appointments and thus calm unfounded ethnic suspicions as we are still trapped in the old ways of thinking, behaviour and planning.