Badly managed Universities

Lack of meritocracy in the selection of higher education officials seems to have become a standard practice rather than an aberration. Taking a suo motu notice on last Sunday of the appointment of vice chancellors of various public sector universities in Punjab, three of them medical education institutions, a two-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, found the incumbents in four cases were appointed in utter disregard of requisite qualifications. In an earlier hearing, it turned out that the Multan Medical University's VC was the holder of a PhD in an unrelated discipline, zoology. All three have resigned on court's orders. The health minister and secretary have been directed to constitute new search committees for the appointment of their replacements.
The court also suspended the VC of Lahore College University, Professor Uzma Qureshi, and Punjab University's Dr Zakraya Zakir on somewhat different grounds. In the first instance, although the respondent insisted before the bench her selection was made on merit, the CJP pointed to her connection with the Interior Minister, observing that the court could not tolerate any appointment made without transparency. Apparently, her qualifications, too, were questionable as the court asked the education minister and secretary to discuss the matter with the Chief Minister and form an inquiry committee to decide the pending complaints against Professor Qureshi regarding her research work. In the case of Punjab University, the country's oldest seat of learning, Dr Zakir was removed because he had not only illegally handed a large tract of the university land to the government for an NTDC project, but he had also been serving as its acting head for more than two years. Notably, the government's failure to appoint a regular VC was repeatedly highlighted in the media, but to no avail. It seems to have been interested more in seeing there a person beholden to it, who would do its bidding rather than someone who would defend the institution's independence, promote critical thinking and fresh attitudes about learning and success. Needless to say, the problem is not restricted to Punjab; a similar situation prevails in other provinces as well.
It is a matter of routine for the federal and provincial governments to appoint heads of public sector entities on the basis of loyalty instead of merit. As deplorable as the tendency is, the purpose behind the practice is not difficult to fathom: advancement of personal agendas through pliable political appointees. But there is no clear reason for them to do that in the selection of unqualified persons as heads of educational institutions, especially medical universities. One explanation seems to be the pervasive culture of nepotism and cronyism, the other the desire for control. It is unfortunate, indeed, that this should be happening in this country at a time elsewhere new ideas are being debated about what should constitute higher education. Compliance with the court orders to make appointments in a transparent manner is important; equally, if not more important, is the need for adopting a forward-looking approach to higher education.