There is a heated debate in the country about 'cooling off period' and conflict of interests. Although it is late, the discussion about this is welcome. It has been two years since I retired from the Auditor General and Government Service. After his retirement, according to the decision of the Nepal government last year, he has not taken any government responsibility other than the coordinator of Ncell's share purchase and sale inquiry committee.

According to the constitution of Nepal, there is a provision that after retirement from the head and office bearer of the constitutional body, he will not be accepted for government service. The 'cooling off' period after retirement from the constitutional office is an unlimited period.

In the past, the names of some people, including me, have been publicly revealed as having been directly appointed to the constitutional office from the government service. I have taken responsibility according to the requirements of the state and prevailing laws. If there was a 'cooling period' arrangement at that time, naturally he would have had to wait or he would have been involved in some other work . If this provision had come earlier, some of the officials who are currently in government service would have become inactive or would have been waiting for their turn . Even the officials appointed in the past did not have to tolerate public comments.

In other countries, incumbent government officials are also appointed to constitutional positions. Taking the example of the Auditor General, most of them have come from government services in India. Auditor Generals of Bangladesh are also found to come from Secretary or similar positions . All over the world, there is a trend of most of them going from government service to higher constitutional responsibilities, while in some countries, there is also a trend of appointing political persons. The main thing depends on whether there is a conflict of interest and whether the appointment was made on one's own initiative and influence or if the responsibility was given according to the state's needs. 

A person should understand that taking the appointment of a position means taking that responsibility and risk. In our context, more comments have been made when it is understood in the sense of the state giving responsibility to individuals and taking appointments. When a person fulfills the responsibility of the state, his role should be appreciated, and he is labeled as a beneficiary. Such negative thinking should be abandoned . Contributions made by individuals to the state through government service should also be appreciated. 

The 'cooling off' period in the much publicized government service is a system that restricts any government employee from working in the government, diplomatic, international donor or non-governmental and private sector for a certain period of time after retirement. Its main purpose is to control conflicts of interest, protect and prevent misuse of government secret information and information. Similarly, another main purpose of this is that the high-ranking officials of the government service do not use their official influence to get the positions of the higher government service and more importantly, the appointment made by influencing the political leadership is controlled. The 'cooling' period is basically used to prevent conflicts of interest and to neutralize the influence of power and influence. Such arrangement is applicable in both government and private sector . Depending on the country, this period is from one year to five years.

In the context of Nepal, the State Order and Good Governance Committee of the Parliament has already passed a two-year 'cooling' period after the retirement of the joint secretary and secretary in the Civil Service Bill 2080 . High-ranking officials of the Nepal government are now lobbying in political circles that this provision should not be kept in the Civil Service Act. This kind of running by a high government official is not dignified . Such activities will further confirm the need for a 'cooling off' period. It has been found that the 'cooling period' of high government officials should be applied to other government services as well, as there is discrimination when it is applied only to civil service . The provisions of the Civil Service Act do not cover the non-civilian sectors, additional legal provisions are required to apply the 'cooling period' in all sectors.

In the world, after the retirement of high-ranking government officials, there is a widespread trend of working in the private sector, not only in the government sector or constitutional bodies. Which is also known as 'revolving door' . In Japan, there is a widespread trend of former government officials (amakudari) moving into the top management of large companies . Famous and enlightened government figures in the world are found working in the fields of economic policy making, security, banking, finance, commerce, health, energy, infrastructure, and information technology. Even in Nepal, there are examples of government officials working in banks, financial institutions, energy infrastructure, health, education and other private, international charity organizations and non-governmental organizations after retirement. Our current debate is more focused on the appointment of constitutional bodies than on the private sector and the external sector.

'Cooling off' is generally adopted as a preventive measure to reduce risks including conflicts of interest for a certain period after retirement . Conflict of interest, whether in government office or not, official or professional duties and private interests conflict - in that case, it can arise at any time. The 'cooling off' period may not completely stop the conflict of interest . But influence and pressure can stop . The conflict of interest of an official may remain for a long period after retirement, while there may not be a conflict of interest even in a short period of time or if an official takes another responsibility immediately while remaining in the government service . If there is a question about the conflict of interest in such appointments, it is customary to make a declaration from the concerned person that this is not the case and arrange for a test before giving responsibility. 

Even after the latest appointment, a government official may have a direct conflict of interest when he has to look at his previous work or decision or make a decision. A direct conflict of interest occurs if a government secretary gets responsibility as the head or officer of a constitutional body while remaining in office and has to decide on the work or decision he/she has made in the past. There are many such examples in the past. Some of them have been publicly discussed and commented on. After taking the constitutional appointment of a government official, there may be a situation of potential conflict of interest even after some time. For example, in the case of Lalita Niwas land scam, the involvement of the chief commissioner of the Authority, who made decisions in the capacity of secretary, was seen in the past . This potential conflict of interest has not been anticipated. There may be other such examples. A 'cooling period' can also prevent such a situation . 

At present, the discussion of the 'cooling off' period is based on the intention that the higher government officials who remain in office and use their influence to make decisions in constitutional bodies or other attractive positions should be stopped rather than the conflict of interests in the future. It is indicated that the incumbent high government official uses his authority or power to influence the political power center, or to influence the political leadership in the government. To be more clear, it is also aimed at the practice of killing such responsibilities in a planned manner in coordination with the political leadership. 

In our context, in order to kill high-ranking officials within the civil service, the trend of sending the incumbent officials to other more attractive places, including constitutional bodies, and killing one another after another has become more prevalent. Even if there is no agreement between high government officials and political leadership, there are many examples of sending such officials to other places by giving them more attractive positions. Therefore, even the political leadership should be able to take a stand and take a decision on such issues. Appointments should not be made only under the influence and pressure of the staff. The political leadership should be able to pay attention to his qualifications, abilities and government needs, not the tendency to choose employees . The political leadership should be able to operate the bureaucracy in a prudent manner .

There are various distortions within the bureaucracy . But with a few exceptions, some degree of discipline and professional religion has been maintained among government officials . It should not be taken to mean that everything is wrong . It should not be forgotten that it has been maintained until now because there are some responsible and patriotic employees within the government apparatus . In some places, the responsible government official may be required. A 'cooling off period' is a popular practice in terms of keeping the door open for retired experienced and skilled employees to join the public service. It is a method to keep the constitutional body neutral, to end the conflict of interest, to control the planned setting, to protect government sensitive information and to control the misuse of service contact and divorce for a certain period. In the context of Nepal, the 'cooling off' period is a necessity caused by our own conduct and behaviour. The only important question is how to organize it .