The way top appointments have been made to the various vacancies in government, public enterprises or in semi-government organisations gives little indication that the new coalition government has marked a major departure for the better from past practice. There have been two ways of filling the top vacancies — by rewarding existing government employees, often in the same organisations, or from outside; the latter option has come to be known here as ‘political appointments’. There are also certain posts in which top appointments have to be made through internal promotion, and for good reasons. However one may choose to make a distinction but there is no guarantee that one option is better than the other. This is pertinent in light of the criticism that tends to surface after such appointments, particularly when they are from outside, that the government has politicised State institutions, or that people should rather be picked up from within the institutions concerned, or from among those ‘not affiliated’ to the political parties.

But this argument has lost sight of the most important consideration — what the appointees are supposed to perform in order to do credit to their posts and to their institutions. They need to be competent, hardworking, upright, innovative, and they should know their job fully and have the capacity to make bold and sound decisions. For certain jobs, they should also command high public standing in related fields, for example, for the top vacancies of the Nepal Academy. These qualities are what really matter. Whether the appointees are employees, outsiders, or those from political backgrounds hardly matter. The only test is: Can they deliver? The Maoist-led government has not been in power even 100 days, and therefore, it is too early to judge its appointees on the basis of their outcome.

However, something of important can be gleaned about the suitability of persons for specific tasks given their academic qualifications, their training, their experience, and their other credentials. Judged thus, most of the appointments made so far have hardly been inspiring. The appointments decided by the Cabinet on Wednesday, including to the National Planning Commission, have further strengthened this view. These appointees may well be competent at their fields, but whether they fit the bill in their new assignments is very doubtful. One wonders why the constituent parties of the government have seen no better alternatives available in the country. The performance of the government appointees will considerably shape that of the government itself. Good intentions are not enough; right men at the right jobs are also crucially important. And what they do will throw reflection on the government’s scorecard, because they and their institutions are part of government. The Maoists take the brunt of any poor show, because they lead the government and because the people are expecting something special from the Maoists, a fresh departure from the past in governance, for obvious reasons. They are on test.