After going through the public feedback given by Mr. Ilhan Niaz, I felt that some arguments were raised which needs to be thoroughly analyzed to give a complete picture.
First of all, Mr. Ilhan complained that he wasn’t provided descriptive detail of the curriculum courses of PAS training courses. This seems to be a lack of proper communication on his part since mostly when the panelists appear for one session only, normally they require only an overview of the courses taught due to shortage of time. However, if he wanted a detailed curriculum, I believe he could have clearly communicated it. Then he mentioned that one of the panelists, who was a civil servant, was eating with his camera on while you were speaking which caused lot of distress. I believe without knowing what the other person behind the camera was going through in terms of physical health, one cannot comment on why he was having a meal during Mr. Ilhan’s talk which I’m sure university students don’t do, at least by keeping their camera on.
Then Mr. Ilhan’s declaration regarding the collective behavior of PAS officers in post-lunch session “a lost cause” also raise the same questions which he raised early on. First of all, to underestimate a group of any individuals in spite of whatever prejudice or bias he might have against them, at least require more than few sessions and couple of years of research to have at least some understanding of the specific curriculum. However, being an active researcher at a renowned university, I was least expecting a pre-emptive strike from such an acclaimed lecturer. I hope he didn’t fell prey to the phrase “don’t judge a book by its cover.” To make it clear, CSA also offer Evidence Based Decision Making online courses and physical workshops in affiliation with Harvard Kennedy School (HKS). In the 47th CTP, two faculty members of HKS also visited CSA and assessed probationary officers in both group and individual settings and their feedback is incorporated into future trainings as well. However, it is disheartening to see such immature comments from Mr. Ilhan’s end rather than HKS. It would have been more productive if he pointed out some flaws in the overall mechanism but since according to him, he wasn’t given a detailed description so he was not in a position to comment on it as well. Then he mentioned that DG CSA interrupted female presenter and made insensible interventions during her talk. One of the things which are taught at CSA is that one has to have psychological nerves to withstand pressure situations as their job is not to sit in air-conditioned offices but to do field operations and deal with public so such exercises are conducted in order to make them mentally strong. This is often coupled with case studies where PAS officers are often in the midst of mob situations where they have to tackle the mob and keep their nerves so that they do not speak anything which might instigate outrage among public.
Then comes Mr. Ilhan’s criticism of recommending book such as “The Seven habits of highly effective people” appears totally unnecessary, especially being an academician himself. Had he known that his book “The Culture of Power & Governance of Pakistan 1947-2008” was given for book review in the Specialized Training Programs, perhaps he wouldn’t have argued about it? Then later he recommended some books and courses which could be part of curriculum which also invalidates his own argument, but still at least he managed to come up with one good suggestion in a series of vague and hasty comments. Moreover, the comment that no one bothered to interrupt or challenge DG seems way out of proportion and a clear case of ad hominem which is using personal attacks rather than logic to sabotage the image of.