The fairness and meritocracy of a recruitment process go a long way in terms of upholding justice in society. Each year, thousands of Pakistan’s brightest minds appear in the Civil Superior Services (CSS) examination – one of the most competitive and intellectually rigorous exams in the country that inducts young candidates into the country’s bureaucratic brass. These individuals go on to hold key positions within government departments and ministries, effectively shaping the country’s governance landscape. While some get to secure these coveted roles, a significant number of candidates remain unallocated despite qualifying for the written and interview stages of the exam. Despite having proven their abilities, these individuals are left in a state of oblivion, raising legitimate questions regarding the examination’s ability to fully impart justice to qualified candidates.
Ignoring the plight of unallocated candidates who have demonstrably proven their merit is not only unwise but also reflects institutional insensitivity.
CSS exams are conducted every year, with official allocation remaining dismally low. In 2022, 20,262 candidates appeared for the exam, and 374 were able to qualify. It is concerning to notice that 137 candidates were not able to secure allocation despite clearing the written and interview stages. The predicament of non-allocation persisted in 2023 as well. A total of 13,008 candidates appeared for the exam, and the qualification figure stood at a mere 386. Approximately 176 candidates were not inducted despite having cleared all stages of the exam. An unallocated candidate is essentially treated as a failed one, left with the choice to either restart the entire process or abandon their aspiration for a career in the civil services.
Although the passing and allocation figures might vary slightly each year, non-allocation is a persistent trend in almost every CSS exam. This is a paradoxical phenomenon: the government faces a serious shortage of skilled professionals in administrative and policy domains; yet, it continues to overlook people who have demonstrated their potential through the government’s recruitment mechanisms. The relevant authorities must confront a fundamental question: if merit has been established through evaluation, what justifies the absence of corresponding opportunity or recognition?
The CSS exam is an arduous journey that takes an emotional and financial toll on candidates. When years of hard work and dedication finally place him/her on the merit list, the eventuality of non-allocation feels like sheer injustice inflicted on a deserving candidate who has fulfilled all the criteria to be inducted. Consequently, the weakening of the bond between the state and talented youth becomes an expected outcome, one that contributes directly to brain drain. Non-allocation, therefore, not only signifies a disregard for valuable human capital but also represents a careless waste of public resources invested in conducting and evaluating the CSS examinations.
Beyond the limited number of positions in the bureaucracy, the CSS exam’s quota system distributed across provinces, women, and minority groups also contributes to the issue. Setting aside the debate over the quota system itself, there are additional structural gaps that warrant critical examination. For instance, the relevant body, the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC), does not maintain a structured database of unallocated candidates, nor is there a national pool of evaluated candidates. Furthermore, the FPSC lacks a mechanism or standard operating procedures to collaborate with other public and private institutions for the alternative placement of this talent. This absence suggests a limited commitment to the broader principles of merit and equitable recruitment.
The nation’s chronic governance problems could be addressed significantly by respecting and utilising its talented human capital. First of all, the government should establish a centralised national talent pool that includes unallocated CSS candidates as well as similar candidates from other competitive exams. This pool should be made accessible to public and private organisations via an online portal. Moreover, FPSC should sign MOUs with public and private sector organisations to alternatively induct unallocated candidates in research and administrative roles. The candidates could also serve as suitable recruits in think tanks, considering that their grasp on policy issues and contemporary affairs is already recognised by the CSS evaluation process. Similarly, FPSC may also collaborate with the Higher Education Commission (HEC) in this regard. After a set of additional screenings, unallocated candidates could join academia as lecturers or opt for higher studies abroad.
Ignoring the plight of unallocated candidates who have demonstrably proven their merit is not only unwise but also reflects institutional insensitivity. Implementation of the above measures would go a long way in restoring public confidence in state institutions and reversing the rising trend of brain drain. Resultantly, these steps would also contribute to broader endeavours towards institutional reforms and good governance by retaining and utilising qualified human capital. It is never too late to rectify the structural gaps and recognise the excellence of the young population. The nexus of meritocracy and justice would certainly serve as a key to national progress and social cohesion. Let us reimagine and materialise a better tomorrow for our starry-eyed youth.
The writer is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. He can be reached at cass.thinkers @casstt.com.