Letter: Accountability and trust in public administration

Dear Editor, Public administration plays a vital role in safeguarding the interests of civil servants and the wider community, and ensuring trust in the management and delivery of state services.

I was forced to resign simply for doing my job as a dedicated public servant – researching and proposing policy reforms, highlighting organisational inefficiencies and national development opportunities, which were seen as threats. This led to workplace discrimination and bullying, and established a culture of unwillingness to address needed improvements.

In an effort to seek redress through formal channels, I have engaged with the CEO and the Chairman of the Board, but have been met with obstruction and discrimination. When it comes to legal recourse, I intend to utilize the accountability mechanisms designed to protect the public trust. Unfortunately, this exposes the corruption of public administration, where protecting the misconduct of senior officials is prioritized over addressing the misconduct.

It is costly to seek legal representation to remedy the situation, and the department takes advantage of this by dragging its feet on responses to legal correspondence, pushing deadlines past their due dates, and forcing former civil servants to fund further steps. This deliberate tactic drains funds, silences the problem, while protecting senior officials from misconduct and undermining public confidence. Current senior officials should be investigated, and their performance managed to ensure that the national service works for the public, not against them. How many other (former) civil servants have suffered from this?

Addressing misconduct and policy violations must be transparent and swift to restore public trust. Ministers overseeing departments must ensure compliance with regulations and ethical behavior to create a safe work environment free of discrimination.

Regulators must uphold accountability and integrity. Failure to do so raises concerns about protecting the public interest and upholding ethical standards, rather than protecting senior officials who are unable to perform their duties due to personal bias, incompetence and constitutional values.

Legislation provides the governance framework and regulatory guidelines which are essential for transparency and accountability. The Code of Conduct under the Public Service Act ensures that public servants discharge their duties effectively. Oversight is essential to maintaining the integrity and fairness of state service governance. Who is this “oversight”? Why has the legislative process not reached their doorstep, or has it already?

The purpose of seeking redress through formal channels with the CEO and the board chair is to reach a resolution that is not implemented. The purpose of pursuing legal avenues is to address issues that the board has not proactively addressed. The purpose of the board taking advantage of the impending deadline is to force the issue to be suppressed.

Our experience is that following a process designed for the public to raise concerns or grievances in order to reach a resolution that allows you to continue to make a living only leads you to believe that it will work for you, when in fact… it is designed to allow the other side to exploit it to silence you and cover up wrongdoing. So, the question now is: if this design is so easy to exploit, why hasn’t the relevant authorities fixed this? How can the “process” be fixed so that it actually helps people successfully reach a resolution? And, how will the authorities transparently demonstrate to the public that the process has been fixed?

As a former public servant, the injustices I suffered have not been acknowledged or compensated, while those responsible continue to carry out their duties with impunity. Despite due process being followed, public servants often find their voices ignored and they work in a system that shields misconduct, unregulated intervention and protects mediocrity to control pay and privilege. This situation undermines the public’s confidence to report grievances and seek justice.

It is time for the general public to remind our Government that every public servant, regardless of their position, is expected to serve the people of the Cook Islands with integrity and dedication. If they fail to do their job, their grievance process should be respected and heard, and the function of the “watchdog” should be to resolve the matter quickly to ensure that the state service serves the public interest, not undermine it.

This story highlights the need for systemic change, while not forgetting the dedication of the many public servants who serve with dignity and pride. Cook Islands citizens at large, please accept my story in the hope that all will be better cared for.

Former civil servant

(Provide name and address)