In Mauritania, the country's development is being hindered by strict regulations and laws that limit the ability of public officials to make decisions and achieve results. According to Le Calame, these restrictions are a major contradiction in the country's governance, as they require officials to produce results while limiting their ability to take action. This has led to a situation where officials are unable to make decisions quickly, and are often forced to consider factors that are not in the best interest of the country.
The country's regulatory framework is designed to prevent corruption, but it has been criticized for being overly restrictive and not allowing for enough flexibility and innovation. This has led to a situation where officials are more focused on following procedures than on achieving results. For example, a director who was known for being frugal and careful with expenses delayed the acquisition of an important work, only to end up having to rent it at a higher cost.
The issue is not just about spending money, but about using resources effectively to achieve results. In some cases, not spending money can be a sign of poor management, rather than good management. For instance, a public institution that returned a portion of its subsidy to the treasury was seen as a sign of honesty, but it was later discovered that the institution had not paid its electricity bills.
To address this issue, there is a need to revisit the procedures and regulations that govern public management in Mauritania. This includes giving public officials more freedom to make decisions and take action, while also holding them accountable for results. The goal is to strike a balance between preventing corruption and allowing for effective management.
One possible solution is to introduce a system of reciprocal engagement, where public officials are given the resources and autonomy they need to achieve results, in exchange for being held accountable for those results. This would involve defining clear objectives and indicators of success, and giving officials the freedom to choose their own team and make decisions.
The issue of team composition is an important one, as public officials need to be able to choose their own team in order to achieve results. In some cases, officials are forced to work with teams that are imposed on them, which can limit their ability to make decisions and take action.
An example of the challenges faced by public officials in Mauritania is the case of a former Prime Minister who was forced to accept a list of ministers proposed by a party in the presidential majority. This highlights the need for more flexibility and autonomy in the appointment of officials, and for a more results-oriented approach to governance.
Key points
- The country's governance is hindered by strict regulations and laws that limit the ability of public officials to make decisions and achieve results.
- There is a need to strike a balance between preventing corruption and allowing for effective management.
- A system of reciprocal engagement could be introduced, where public officials are given the resources and autonomy they need to achieve results, in exchange for being held accountable for those results.
