Threat to public service

The recent, abrupt removal of three Career Executive Service Officers (CESO) from a government agency has sent shockwaves through the Philippine bureaucracy. More than just a personnel shakeup, the incident struck at the heart of what the Career Executive Service (CES) was designed to protect: stability, professionalism, and merit-based leadership in public service.

CESOs are not political appointees who come and go. They are career professionals who have passed rigorous selection processes. At the core of this system lies a most fundamental principle in public service: security of tenure.

This is not a privilege, but a constitutional safeguard meant to insulate civil servants from arbitrary dismissal and the shifting winds of politics.

Yet the recent removals seemed to have skirted due process, raising concerns not only about the rights of the affected individuals but about the future of every CESO in government service.

When job security is treated as expendable, the ripple effects are immediate and dangerous.

Public servants begin to look over their shoulders, keeping mum rather than speaking the truth. The atmosphere becomes one of fear, caution and uncertainty, not initiative or courage.

This kind of climate corrodes the soul of public service. It kills morale, paralyzes good governance, and makes progress difficult to attain.

Worse, the dismissals have come at a time when public trust in government is still fragile. The perception that even competent career officials who rose through the ranks can be removed at a moment’s notice further erodes confidence in the system.

How can we trust institutions that cannot protect their own? The rule of law must apply most of all within the government itself.

When protocols are bypassed, when removals are perceived as political or retaliatory, cynicism deepens both within the bureaucracy and among the public.

This threat to public service extends far beyond the three officials involved. Their colleagues are now left to wonder: who’s next? What recourse do we have if we fall out of favor, despite years of service and a spotless record? These questions chip away at the stability that the CES was meant to ensure.

If government agencies can so easily discard CESOs, we are not just violating protocol; we are dismantling a decades-old safeguard against politicization and instability. And in so doing, we risk losing the very people who make government work — those who serve not for power, self-interest or politics, but for public good.

Countering this threat is not complicated, but it demands political will. Due process must be non-negotiable. Procedures for separation must be followed with transparency and integrity.

A culture of fear must be replaced with a culture of respect — one where merit, not political expediency, determines a civil servant’s future.

This moment is a test — not just of leadership, but of our commitment to constitutional principles and democratic governance.

Upholding CESO protections is not about shielding individuals from accountability; it’s about preserving a professional civil service that serves all Filipinos with competence, dedication and independence.

By keeping silent in the face of this threat to public service, we not only stand to lose three CESOs — we stand to lose the very foundation of a fair and functional bureaucracy.

And that is a loss the country cannot afford.