Jakarta had been thinking about the importance of shura and was wondering how best to create an environment and process in which such consultation could take place.
He decided to share some thoughts on his blog.
All ministers of state would automatically become members of the Council of Advisors which would discuss issues and policies with the leader of SA on a regular basis. All proceedings of the Council would be broadcast live. All briefing material made available to the Advisors would be made freely available on the internet.
On a weekly basis an auction process would determine who would be an additional member of the Council. Each appointee would have security of tenure for ten years. Each appointee would have to fully disclose the source of the funds behind winning the auction. But wouldn't this be an open form of corruption and undermine the 'moral authority' of the Council? For a start, as its title suggests the Council's ultimate remit was only one of advice; the auction process would simply be a mechanism for lobbyists, pressure groups, NGOs etc to put across their views in a public forum. Furthermore, if the proceedings of the Council were deemed to be of genuine transparency and value it would take up a significant amount of Jakarta and his ministers' time and in so doing would limit the opportunity for corruption through private channels. After each such appointment, the leader of SA would be entitled to propose a further appointee (based on merit and perceived utility to SA) which would then be openly discussed by the existing members of the Council. Jakarta thought that these two different routes of appointment would bring a diverse and talented group of people into the Council.
He decided to share some thoughts on his blog.
All ministers of state would automatically become members of the Council of Advisors which would discuss issues and policies with the leader of SA on a regular basis. All proceedings of the Council would be broadcast live. All briefing material made available to the Advisors would be made freely available on the internet.
On a weekly basis an auction process would determine who would be an additional member of the Council. Each appointee would have security of tenure for ten years. Each appointee would have to fully disclose the source of the funds behind winning the auction. But wouldn't this be an open form of corruption and undermine the 'moral authority' of the Council? For a start, as its title suggests the Council's ultimate remit was only one of advice; the auction process would simply be a mechanism for lobbyists, pressure groups, NGOs etc to put across their views in a public forum. Furthermore, if the proceedings of the Council were deemed to be of genuine transparency and value it would take up a significant amount of Jakarta and his ministers' time and in so doing would limit the opportunity for corruption through private channels. After each such appointment, the leader of SA would be entitled to propose a further appointee (based on merit and perceived utility to SA) which would then be openly discussed by the existing members of the Council. Jakarta thought that these two different routes of appointment would bring a diverse and talented group of people into the Council.
No comments:
Post a Comment