I find it hard to believe that supersession was done on the basis of qualifications or experience. There were other reasons. Services rendered, religious and communal appurtenance, ethnic lobbies are the criteria for promotion nowadays and not meritocracy.

She dedicated 37 years of her life to the civil service and made the headlines in some court cases against what she saw as an injustice in the promotion exercise. Today, Asha Burrenchobay, former Senior Chief Executive, is retired. We invited her to shed some light on the workings of a sector she knows only too well, with a particular focus on the situation of women within the service.  

You spent a great many years in the top ranks of the civil service at a time when it was – and probably still is – male-dominated. How did that work out for you?
It still is very male-dominated at the top management of the administrative cadre. The gender bias is very much still there. We have yet to have a woman Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service, Secretary for Home Affairs or Secretary for Public Service.

You nearly got there yourself, didn’t you?
Reachable, it could have been but no, I didn’t. When I came back after my graduation and a three-year attachment at the Commonwealth Secretariat in London, I took part in a competitive exam to join the administrative cadre. I was recruited as a Trainee Administrative Officer in September 1985. I had at that time the logical aim to terminate my career as the first woman Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service in view of my age and ranking in the seniority list. However, I was not given the opportunity. 

Is it because of a gender bias or a political one?
I think it is a combination of both. Politics does unfortunately play an important role. The spoil system tends to be omnipresent currently… 

How were you perceived politically?
As a self-respecting civil servant, I worked conscientiously and to the best of my abilities with the government of the day. I will always cherish the opportunity of having worked with Dr Navin Chandra Ramgoolam, Sir Anerood Jugnauth, Paul Bérenger, Steven Obeegadoo, Nando Bodha, Alan Ganoo, Jean Claude de L’Estrac, Dharam Fokeer and Sam Lauthan inter alia. They had a very professional approach. Only the political masters can say how I was politically perceived! But I guess I was perceived as Baron’s daughter.

And has that dogged you throughout your career?
Yes, to a great extent. It started with the appointment of Principal Assistant Secretaries. For some unknown reason, a few colleagues, along with me, were superseded and other officers who were our juniors were promoted. We went to court and obtained a judicial review on the bench and eventually won our case.

Whose appointment did you contest?
Upon appointment as Trainee Administrative Officer, we were placed on a seniority list on the basis of our performance in the entry exam. I was ranked 3^rd and contested all my juniors who superseded me. Among others, there were Nayen Ballah, former Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service and current senior advisor at PMO [the prime minister’s uncle – Ed] and Jugdish Phokeer [the current speaker’s brother], currently Commissioner at the Integrity Services Agency. We won our case on the basis that Mr. Phokeer was not eligible at that time for the promotion as he had taken an assignment as Director of the Handicraft Centre if I recall well. When I look back, I believe that since that time, a subtle game of chess was being played and the ultimate objective was to position certain pawns favourably.

 I was continuously being pestered by the HR section of the PMO to state when I proposed to retire. It was becoming obvious to me that I was somehow preventing some reward promotion to occur and some people were desperate to see my back. I therefore opted not to start a new financial year.  

What happened after you won your court case challenging those appointments?
The ranking was rectified somehow in the staff list, but nothing much changed…

Some officers claim that at a change of government, they are given ‘garage’ ministries (ministries that no one wanted). Was Nayen Ballah one of those?
I recall that he once told me that he had been relegated from Prime Minister’s Office to the Ministry of Youth following a change of government. As far as I am concerned, a ministry is a ministry and, as administrators, we need to run same efficiently and ensure that its mandates are fully fulfilled, be it a small or a large one.  

In your case, what exactly happened when the MSM government took power in 2014?
The then Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service told me that he was having difficulty to give me a posting as certain ministers were scared of working with me … I laughed under my breath and took it as a compliment. Sir Anerood Jugnauth, under whose portfolio the National Development Unit fell opted for me to come and work with him. This was a surprise and caused a lot of discontent amongst my colleagues. Very often I was told that Sir Anerood Jugnauth appreciated me, and this was not to the liking of many. I worked directly with him and got to know him better and we got on well.

And when did things start going south?
In December 2019. Instead of a ministry, I was called upon to head the Human rights Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I must be the only Senior Chief Executive not to haven been given a ministry but a division to run.

The then Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service told me that he was having difficulty to give me a posting as certain ministers were scared of working with me … I laughed under my breath and took it as a compliment.

Was that a garage appointment?
You can call it so but I took it as a challenge. There were a lot of outstanding country reports to prepare and I concentrated myself thereon. 

How did you feel?
At times, peeved especially as there was no meritocracy. It was evident that there was a power game and lobbying operation in place and seats were obviously kept warm for other incumbents.

Hasn’t the Civil Service always been politicised in that way?
I believe, nowadays it has become excessively politicised. I was the most senior officer in the administrative cadre after Ballah was appointed Secretary to Cabinet and Head of The Civil Service; yet I was bypassed in promotion exercises by Om Kumar Dabeedin, who was my junior and from a different batch, as well as officers who were junior to me from my batch. Without being pompous, I find it hard to believe that supersession was done on the basis of qualifications or experience. There were other reasons.

Like what?
Without wanting to pinpoint names, I would say services rendered, religious and communal appurtenance, ethnic lobbies are the criteria for promotion nowadays and not meritocracy.

When did you start feeling this blatant nepotism?
Nepotism has always been there but now, it is more obvious. It is done more openly probably on a larger scale without any inhibitions or qualms. In the past decade, connections and ramifications have become more evident.

By throwing out the towel, don’t you feel that you have let down other women in similar situations who are passed over for promotion because of their gender and/or politics?
When I left, there was nothing more I could do. It was blatant that women were not part of any scenario for promotion at the highest ladder of the administrative cadre. Personally, I was continuously being pestered by the HR section of the PMO to state when I proposed to retire. It was becoming obvious to me that I was somehow preventing some reward promotion to occur and some people were desperate to see my back. I therefore opted not to start a new financial year.   

Civil servants are a big lobby and are thought to have an impact on the elections. Do you feel that your ex-colleagues are happy?
(Laughs) I probably meet the wrong people but the feeling I have is that there is a lot of frustration amongst those who have been sidelined. Those who were promoted must, on the other hand, be very happy because even when they retire, they get advisory jobs or other appointments.

When you look back on your life and your career at the Civil Service, what jumps to your mind?
The number of dedicated and hardworking civil servants is dwindling. There are lot of subservient people around for whom bootlicking is the only way to get somewhere. There is also the culture of work to earn a salary without any commitment. The Civil Service had so many valuable elements, most of them graduates from very good universities. Now new entrants are given a lot of training but the question remains as to whether they are able to deliver and work for the country. Previously, youngsters had pride in joining the civil service. I feel nowadays it is no longer attracting the best brains. Is it because these youngsters fear that their skills and competencies will not be recognised after hearing day in and day out various cases where meritocracy did not prevail? Permanent Secretaries in the old days were more respected than now. They were the main advisors of the policy makers. Now, there are swamps of advisers around, each one pulling the sheet on their side. The role of the Permanent Secretary has become merely an executor of decisions taken elsewhere.

Do you feel frustrated that you ended your career without fulfilling your ambitions?
No, my time working on human rights issues has enriched me a lot and has probably made me more knowledgeable about social, economic and political issues affecting this country and its people…  I was happy not to have been entangled in controversies or possible hanky-panky dealings like some of my colleagues have had to fall into.

You are reputed to be difficult. Why?
I am a no nonsense person, quite rigid in my outlook and my conscience is not for sale. I adhere to certain principles which I do not compromise on at all. And I keep records of everything. My father always told me “Les paroles s’envolent mais les écrits restent”, and this has somehow always helped me in protecting myself in the service, especially when I was subject to a lot of mudslinging.