How are Ministers Even Chosen?

BY Ibrahim Abuallail
Actuarial Science Senior
@iabuallail

In a televised interview on March 11, then Justice Minister Ahmed El-Zind slipped up and said that he would put Prophet Mohammed himself behind bars if he broke the law.

He immediately stopped and said “Forgive me, God”, but the damage had been done. Two days later, Prime Minister Sherif Ismail decided that El-Zind would be removed from office.

El-Zind is the second consecutive justice minister to be forced to leave office due to inappropriate remarks, after his predecessor Mahfouz Saber resigned over ‘classist’ comments he said on television.

Saber vocalized his belief that garbage collectors can never be judges, as they had to come from a more “mentally and financially respectable environment.”

It is rather clear that the political scene in Egypt could benefit more from improved rhetoric, especially that of high-ranking state officials. Perhaps the large amount of content that has always been easily available for political satirical shows or social media pages interested in Egyptian politicians could be proof that there is room for improvement in speeches and interviews.

But perhaps there is room for improvement in choosing the high-ranking state officials themselves, especially those fully responsible for ministries and those whose words are heard by millions of people both locally and internationally.

There are several different schools of thought on how cabinets should be chosen. Models of “technocratic” governments became popular in Egypt in their literal sense when ousted President Hosni Mubarak appointed Egypt’s first such government in 2004 led by Ahmed Nazif.

These technocrats are supposed to be non-career politicians, but with a large amount of knowledge or experience in their fields. Many believe that the best doctor should become the health minister, the best officer should become the defense or interior minister, the best petroleum engineer should become the petroleum minister and the best judge should become the justice minister.

Such cabinet structure often gains more popularity during times of crisis, especially of the economic sort, with lobbyists pushing for economic technocrats. The time of the Great Depression in the US is a perfect example of when technocracy became a popular movement.

But history shows that those with knowledge and expertise are not necessarily the best political leaders. In fact, looking as far back as 1621, we find that one f the most revered scientists, Sir Francis Bacon, who brought to light the issue of outliers in statistics, was removed from political office on 33 different charges of corruption.

Many actually believe that cabinet leaders are in political positions that require the power of words more than anything else. It follows, according to this argument, that a person who is in touch with the people, who is able to offer them hope and optimism – be it false or true – should be considered the most fit person for such a political position. As a matter of fact, lawyers were oftentimes chosen as cabinet ministers, because of their rhetorical abilities and their conventionally charismatic nature.

Champions of this idea would probably argue (rightfully so) that if the justice minister had been a lawyer rather than a judge, the probability of forcing two out of their position within the last two years for inadequate speeches and slip-ups, would have been far fewer.

They would probably argue that a good manager, who is able to run hospitals and efficiently allocate resources among them, is all it takes to become a health minister. The same would apply or the petroleum minister. A charismatic leader, would be all it takes to become the minister of interior.

If we observe the international world, models of technocratic and non-technocratic governments both in present day and in history are all around us. Out of the 18 Portuguese health ministers who worked between 1976 and 2012, more than half, or precisely 11, were politicians and not doctors. The French defense minister in 1991, Edith Cresson, was a woman, and she was a politician with no military background.

On the other hand, several European countries considered technocratic governments during the dawn of the 2008 world financial crisis. Many of these governments were somewhat successful in improving the economic conditions in their countries. Perhaps the appointment of economist Mario Monti in 2011 Italy in the wake of the Italian debt crisis is the perfect example of a somewhat successful technocratic experience.

While it is difficult to claim that there is one correct formula for appointing ministers, it is definitely important to consider the power and importance of words as much as the importance of technical knowledge. After all, words can shake up power systems, alter perspectives, or damage people’s lives.