Career diplomats petition SC for 'Ambassador' title

Career diplomats have petitioned the Supreme Court against the Foreign Ministry’s failure to implement a service minute provision which allows Grade 1 officers who are Deputy Chiefs of Mission, Deputy High Commissioners, Consuls General and Ministers to receive the title of “Ambassador”.

Appointment of Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Heads of Mission remains the prerogative of the President. Such persons are invested with the full power of independent action on behalf of their Government, typically in a foreign country.

However, the assignment of “Ambassador” title to diplomats is an administrative arrangement that is done internally by the Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA). In the past, such recognition was granted in an “ad hoc” manner -- and not on prescribed, standard criteria -- to various diplomats. This exposed the system to abuse.

To regularise and institutionalise the practice, provision was made in the new Sri Lanka Foreign Service (SLFS) minute of December 2016 for the Ambassador title to be given to SLFS officers holding ranks of Deputy Chief of Mission,

Deputy High Commissioner, Consul General and Minister. However, this was not implemented.

The amendment was introduced because SLFS officers were losing hope of ever reaching the pinnacle of their careers owing to Sri Lanka’s diplomatic corps being increasingly encroached by political appointees. With a ratio now of about 60 political appointees to 40 career diplomats at Head of Mission level, vacancies to accommodate all SLFS officers who legitimately graduate through the system are dropping.

This is particularly worrying to career diplomats because the size of recent SLFS batches has been larger than in the past. It has bred frustration in the service. The service minute was amended to, at least, grant senior diplomats who are promoted to Grade 1 the rank of Ambassador.

Upon learning that the Public Service Commission (PSC) was proposing to completely drop this provision from the service minute, the Sri Lanka Foreign Service Association (SLFSA) petitioned the Supreme Court to intervene and direct the respondents--MoFA Secretary, members of the PSC, and the Attorney General--to give effect to and implement the SLFS minute fully.

The petitioners are the SLFSA and several members. They say the PSC had decided to remove the relevant provision after a former MoFA Secretary made representations regarding possible cost implications and created confusion between the ambassador rank and the post of Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador who is appointed by the Head of State.

As the new minute was published following approval by Cabinet, the Treasury, the PSC and the Salaries and Cadre Commission, the financial concerns raised are “baseless”, the petitioners state. They say the PSC’s decision to amend the new minute did not have Cabinet sanction. Therefore, it is in derogation of the powers of the Cabinet of Ministers. The PSC also did not consult SLFS officers in this regard.

If given effect, the exclusion of the relevant provision from the minute would demoralise SLFS officers and bar their legitimate expectation of achieving their career goals by preventing them from receiving Ambassador rank -- the highest rank available to an officer before reaching the post of Head of Mission.