New Delhi: Staff of an Indian embassy in a Central American country faced a peculiar hassle. The ambassador had odd working hours that stretched till three in the morning. The dozen odd staff had no option but to stay put, throwing their lives out of gear.
This is one of the extreme examples of grievance which came to light through the revival of the Directorate of General Inspections, the Ministry of External Affairs' dedicated performance monitoring department.
As Sunday Standard had reported first on February 2015, foreign secretary S Jaishankar said at the annual conference of 120 Indian envoys that reviving the inspections of missions would be one of his priorities.
In previous decades, there had been intermittent ad-hoc inspections, before the DGI was formally set up in 2004. Even then due to lack of manpower, there had been no inspections between 2011 to 2014.
For the first time in recent years, the Directorate, currently under an additional secretary in MEA, has been on a hectic regimen to achieve an ambitious target in 2015-16. "Our target in this financial year was to inspect 35 missions. So far, we have completed 15," said a senior government official.
During one such inspection to a Central American country, the team from ministry found that the prevalent staff gripe was over working hours. Apparently, the Indian envoy in the Central American nation had a habit of reaching office at 4 p.m. and then leaving office at 3 a.m. next day. "As you can imagine, there were several complaints from the embassy staff," said another MEA official.
In a gulf country, known for being relatively liberal, mission officials were unhappy that ambassador had put a total ban on alcohol usage. "Even if the host country had alcohol prohibition, it does not apply to diplomatic personnel and foreign citizens. Employees were rather annoyed at this dictat," he said.
Most of the inspections have taken place in missions in Africa, Asia, Latin America and Pacific Islands. In the neighbourhood, Indian embassies in Pakistan, China and Afghanistan have also undergone a thorough check.
The missions are chosen based on several factors, like, concerns raised by staff and members of Indian community, lack of response from local government, reporting inefficiencies and property issues.
For example, an Indian embassy in a Southern African country was selected as MEA headquarters had noted "almost zero reporting". "The problem here was not commission, but complete omission," quipped an official.
An inspection team was assembled for an East African nation, as staff had complained of "concentration of powers" by the ambassador - who had received a number of 'warnings'. Then, in a large Asian country, there were concerns that a new chancery building had not let to a substantial decrease in rental outgo.
Sometimes, the inspection teams have run into issues of more 'sensitive' nature, which require delicate handling. The wife of an Indian ambassador in a gulf country had apparently thrown her weight around, which led to complaints from staff. "But, this grouse was of much milder nature - compared to when an Indian ambassador had given a separate room to his wife in the embassy building, several years ago," he said.
With foreign secretary directly overseeing the DGI, special operating procedures (SOPs) had been drawn up to help tighten the entire process. It begins with detailed questionnaire to the missions, which are then analysed in headquarters and followed by meetings of relevant stakeholders. "There is a lot of preparation which goes before the team actually goes into the field," he said.
At the mission, the 3-member team interviews each employee from the ambassador to the lowest rank official, along with examination of accounts and files on reports. Before the team leaves, there is usually a feedback meeting, where the ambassador is often told candidly about what the inspectors observed.
"The correct diagnosis of a lingering problem is half the battle won," said an official.