A code for our ‘public servants’

I have in my hands a copy of the Official Gazette of the 15th of July 1998. Published in this gazette and entitled “Instructivo No. 1”, we can find the Code of Conduct for Public Servants. I have this document because someone threw it into my lap a few days ago and asked me what I thought of it. I have been at a loss for words since then. Maybe I am at a loss for words because this is one of those circumstances in which keeping quiet is exactly what is called for when having noble sentiments or simply a good code of conduct.

On Father’s Day, when my daughters come up with presents of gigantic multicolored key rings with looks on their faces that say “use it or you don’t love me”, I don’t merely hide my reservations but even am able to produce evidence of infinite enthusiasm. 

When a friend who has recently discovered his hidden talent for painting shows me his first works, I also hide my reservations with words such as “how interesting”, albeit distorted just a wee bit by a mild cough. 

When a person I don’t know commits the type of faux pas that most of us commit at one time or another, I also hide my reservations with total silence. If such a silence simply aggravates the embarrassment of that person I even, educated as I am, tend to create some diversion to ease the pain.

No way am I going to hold my tongue on this one! This “Code of Conduct” was signed, based on a 40-year-old Constitution, by an outgoing President and 23 Ministers, professionals, neighbors and of age. I don’t see why I have to hide my reservations.

I am not saying that it is wrong to require that a Public Servant be “honest, fair, polite, loyal, disciplined, efficient, responsible, punctual, transparent and clean and that he have a calling to serve”. As standards, these are so logical that they should be required even to simply aspire to a post as Public Servant.

I am also not saying it is wrong to try to define each and every one of these traits, even though I think the place and time to do this is during primary school.

What I am saying, however, is that it is a bit disquieting to see the publication of a ‘manual’ like this one in a formal vehicle such as the Official Gazette. Specially when the fact that we are going through a moment of such emotional import as is the transition to a new millenium while facing one of Venezuela’s worst crises, both structural and temporary, should merit a ‘real’ effort to push the country towards a new path or model of development.

It is disquieting because it reflects the traditional attitude of our governments that think that all our ills are a result of human frailties and cultural faults that can simply be rectified by decree.

Disquieting because it reflects the degree of shamelessness that our governments have achieved. They have thrown the first stone and preach of truth, trying thereby to tell us that those in the driver’s seat have been, are, and always will be, over and above the flagrant violations of each and every article in the new code.

It must be due to all of this that it is so difficult to remain silently discreet. For example, should the government simply have offered its excuses for the difficult market conditions in which the Brady Bond swap was executed and the recent dollar issue of 20 year bonds at 14% was floated instead of sandbagging us by selling both as great achievements, the adverse reactions would have been minimized. Luckily, this will not happen again. Paragraph (a) of Article 26 of the Norms states that “Every person is entitled to know the truth. The Public Servant must not omit or falsify .........”.

All publications in the Official Gazette are subject to occasional typographical errors. Unfortunately this must be the case in Article 17:1 in which we read: “Those persons who have occupied public office must not use information obtained during this time against the interests of the Republic for at least one year”. The statute of limitations of the prohibition to use anything at all as a tool to attack the best interests of the Nation should definitely not prescribe!

The Code frequently repeats that its contents must be made public (could this actually acquire the status of Mao’s Little Red Book?); calls for the creation of a National Board of Public Ethics; and allows Public Offices to issue complementary norms as long as these are kept “within the framework of the spirit of the Code”. We evidently have not heard the last word.

As an incentive, the Code specifies in one of its articles that the Public Servants must comply with the former in order to be eligible for “condecorations awarded on the Day of the Public Servant”. Unfortunately, the Code does not include one article, one paragraph, one letter, nor one comma with regards to what would happen should a public official not comply with the letter of the decree. This evidently renders the entire effort less credible and efficient.

However, all is not lost. This Code, published in a leather hardcover and placed in the drawers of the night tables of local hotels, could indeed become a precious souvenir for foreign tourists. Additionally, Paragraph (c) of Article 19 states that the “Public should be treated with the formal “Usted” and familiarities should be avoided ....”. Could we finally be close to getting rid of the familiar “mi amor” and “mi vida”?