Kamel Idris is not the envoy, the owner of the message

He wrote .. Muhammad Zia al-Din- The assignment of the ministers in Sudan has always been related to their visions and personal programs, some wonder, what is the Hamdouk program? What is the entire program of Idris? In this context, it is noteworthy that some, like Kamel Idris, came after his assignment carried his book with his right hand, as if the people are waiting for salvation from the vision of an individual, whatever it is.

Thus, this mentality is transferred to all ministers, where each of them is expected to enter his ministry, holding his (his book), which represents his own program, and does not reflect a specific national or strategy vision.

As a result, the state administration turns into a group of isolated islands, each ministry operates in isolation from the other, according to the minister’s perception and special appreciation, in a scene closer to (individual experimentation). Indeed, some political and popular circles have become considered this individualism as the measure of the success of the minister. For example, Kamel Idris is seen as the owner of a vision because he came with his own perception that he announced before his duties, while Hamdouk is criticized because he awaited the program of freedom forces and change when he was assigned, as if waiting for the collective program a weakness attributed to Hamduk, and not in the interest of consensus and institutionalization.

It should be noted here that dealing with the experience of some names, as in the case of Kamel Idris, is not intended to recognize the legitimacy of their executive sites, in light of the authority of a reality that is not based on constitutional legitimacy. Rather, what calls for discussion is the mental model that this individual appearance reflects, as an example of the problem of converting state administration into personal initiatives isolated from the state’s public project.

On the other hand, the rational administration of the state should be based on a unified government program, clearly defined, stemming from a consultative process and collective planning. Accordingly, the Council of Ministers must be the authority authorized to set an integrated executive plan, in which the tasks of each ministry and its priorities are accurate, within the framework of a unified strategic vision of the state.

The transgression of individual mindset in administration is a basic introduction to regulating government work, ensuring institutional harmony and integration between sectoral policies. In other words, each minister should not be seen as (a project owner), but rather as part of a system responsible for implementing the state’s universal policies. The minister’s success is measured by his ability to translate the government program into tangible results within his ministry, not with his isolated individual creativity.

Moreover, it is necessary to emphasize that the minister, in this institutional framework, is only an implementation within a executive authority of state policies that exceed people and whims. This does not mean depriving the minister of initiative or innovation, but rather that his creativity is governed by the general framework and consistent with the vision of the state, so that the ministries do not contest in the directions, goals and special jurisprudence.

The transition from the management model based on individual visions and personal programs, to a model based on a comprehensive government program and consistent central planning, is a condition for building a modern state, capable of achieving its development goals, consolidating its institutions, and ensuring the effectiveness of its performance and sustaining its national path.

The state is not built with personal inspiration, but rather by institutionalization, planning, and integration between its institutions. The state administration must transcend the logic of (the envoy owner) towards an administration based on a unified program, which is the first step towards stability, development and building a state of law and institutions.