NACO DG must be appointed through a fair and objective selection process

[Guest guest]

The Director General of National AIDS Control Organization (DG NACO) must be

appointed through a fair and objective selection procedure.

Joe

Good governance is increasingly understood as an essential ingredient, to ensure

a fair and equitable health service delivery. National AIDS Control

organization (NACO) is a premier public health service agency in India.

The Director General (DG), the head NACO, provides leadership to the HIV/AIDS

control programme in India through 35 State AIDS Control Societies (SACS),

commands a staff of 150 and an annual budget of Rs 1100 crore (about US$ half a

billion) is delivering most of its services through about 2,000 Non

Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Community Based Organizations (CBO).

Governance of such a massive HIV response system is a matter of genuine public

concern.

Better governance practices are increasingly being demanded from the public

healthcare delivery systems. Public Health governance is the process of public

health decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or

not implemented).

The concept of good governance is based on multidisciplinary technical and

ethical competencies to ensure that the right interventions are in place and

effective translation of knowledge into public health research, policy and

practices. Good governance also means good stewardship of public money and good

public engagement which ultimately results to good outcomes for all the

stakeholders, which is translated into better quality of life and increased

survival rates.

Till recently, under the UN and WHO guidance the NACO estimated that about 5.7

million people are living with HIV in India. The current estimate (mostly under

leadership of an Indian scientist, (Prof. Lalit Dandona) indicates that the HIV

prevalence is half of the earlier estimates.

This outrageous overestimation of HIV prevalence in India could be attributed

partially to the technical incompetency of then senior officials of NACO, and a

failure of it's good governance practices.

Cost of poor health governance could be disastrous. Indian HIV Inc has yet

assess the credibly cost of overestimation of HIV prevalence in India.

To ensure effective service delivery, NACO and other donor agencies are

increasingly demanding good governance practices from these NGOs and CBO. In

such context, it is a good practice for NACO itself to subject to better

governance practices.

Request for constituting a fair, objective and transparent process in the

selection of the Director General (DG) is a fair demand.

Considering the requirement of the technical competency and the public health

policy implications, government of India must constitute an objective and

transparent selection procedure for the post the Director General (DG) of

National AIDS Control Organization (NACO).

An already existing agency such as The Public Enterprises Selection Board (PESB)

could be entrusted with the selection of the DG NACO.

The PESB is a high powered body constituted by Government of India in 1987

which was subsequently amended from time-to-time. The PESB has been set up with

the objective of evolving a sound managerial policy for the Central Public

Sector Enterprises and, in particular, to advise Government on appointments to

their top management posts.

The Government policy in all the appointment of the Public Service Units (PSU)

is `to appoint through a fair and objective selection procedure outstanding

professional managers to higher levels of positions'.

Various public health agencies such as Artificial Limbs Manufacturing

Corporation of India (Under the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment), and

the Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd are selecting it's senior officials through PESB.

Considering the public health importance of NACO, there is no excuse for

continuing the current practice of non transparent selection procedure for the

post of DG NACO.