Senator Amara Konneh writes;

The Civil Service Agency’s ( CSA) recent firing of employees unaffiliated with the ruling party for “insulting leaders” is wrong! Most of those fired were supporters of the main opposition party, the Coalition for Democratic Change (CDC).

The CSA circular memorandum (below) issued yesterday (8/19/24) warns all mainline government personnel to refrain from bullying and other forms of misconduct. On the surface, the threat of disciplinary action for violating the CSA’s policies is a welcome development. But reading between the lines, I have two questions.

First and foremost, how does the CSA intend to monitor misconduct in a society where people rarely blow the whistle for fear of being ostracized? The CSA’s only tool—or at least its simplest and fastest—is to monitor civil servants’ social media activity. But in doing so, the CSA risks pushing the government down the slippery slope from reasonable monitoring of public activity to effectively limiting the freedom of speech among its employees.

That leads to my second question: Who is most vulnerable to the CSA’s threat of disciplinary action? Is it ruling party affiliates, who are more likely to defend their government’s actions from every criticism? Or is it non-affiliated opposition staff or independents who are more likely to criticize the government they serve, especially now that they feel disempowered? My money is on the latter.

Can the CSA seriously claim there is one from the ruling party who is making social media statements in contravention of the CSA Human Resources Policy to “exhibit good conduct at all times, both at work and off duty…and shall not act in a manner derogatory to the honor or dignity of the public service”? I’d find that hard to believe.

Assuming the CSA acted in good faith, this glaring disparity and lack of balance in who was targeted with termination wreaks a witch hunt and an effort to purge the government of non-ruling party-affiliated staff. I’m not claiming this was the intent, but one can certainly argue that it appears that way.

If this was the political calculus, just remember that in politics, that cat chasing the mouse today will one day become a mouse as well. We’ve failed to learn this lesson in 177 years as Liberians. Whether we call ourselves cat and mouse, Unity Partisan or CDCian, Christian or Muslim, or what have you, we are all Liberians. Divisiveness hurts us all equally, and we are dying from a death from a thousand cuts. Although each incision may be small, we’re killing ourselves.

If this policy is to be implemented, the leadership of CSA must ensure it is meted out justly and equitably. Failure to do so harms the nation as a whole. If the CSA’s objective is to increase professionalism in its staff, I suggest the Agency meet its staff where they are, invest in research to understand them, and make every effort to build them up.

Yes, that includes firing people for criminal activity, but it should lead with professional development, workplace seminars, and investing in staff of all backgrounds. In my experience, the best reform tools include investing in leadership development, team building, rewards and incentives programs, career development initiatives, consistent salary payment and increase, technological advancement to improve efficiency, and enforcing our anticorruption framework.

It’s time we break with the past and chart a new course of civility and human relations. CSA plays a leading role in this process. It is the arbiter of fairness and ensuring the rights of government employees. Let’s ensure CSA transforms the civil service in a way that is seen as apolitical. Let’s ensure the CSA is respected and admired by all. Censorship will not help us achieve that objective.