Criminal Justice
Choose one of the three questions posed below AND provide an answer to the question you will choose.
Question 1
What does the often-repeated phrase “a government of laws, not of men” mean, and how does it apply to bureaucratic accountability? What are the specific challenges of maintaining this principle in a democratic system like ours? Can you think of any modern-day circumstances where this concept might be applied?
Question 2
Recent whistleblowing activities in the United States have come under scrutiny because the whistleblower’s activities posed a threat to national security. Do you believe that controllers always have a duty to report wrongdoing? Does whistleblowing have multiple standards? Is one type better or more acceptable than another?
Question 3
In the 1940s two political theorists, Carl J. Friedrich and Herman Finer debated a critical question of accountability in American public administration: whether professional norms or external controls were necessary to keep administrators accountable. In other words, how much can we rely on the laws to keep administrators in check and how much can we rely on the uniform training of our administrators? Reenact this historic debate. Which do you think is a better accountability measure: external or internal controls and/or the personal character of the administrator? How do you support your choice? As you know the text deconstructs both of these ideas saying that in the current policy environment neither are effective. Why is this the case? What do you think is the solution to keeping administrators accountable in the 21st century?
ANSWER
A Government of Laws Not Men
Written constitutions have become an essential part of building the country in the modern world. The constitution has been a statement of fundamental law where all individuals can look at the basic principles that are used in governing society. A government of laws and not of men means that society is governed by free government rules that should be fixed and understandable (Raz, 2017). This means that no one is above the law even powerful people or rulers. Once the complexity and diversity of judicial tasks are understood, it becomes apparent enforcement of laws leads to a formalized way of bringing together political preferences. Concerning bureaucratic accountability, laws have been used to control and maintain uniformity of governance within the country. Ideally, the government reins the bureaucracy through the rule of laws since it is responsible for its actions and performance. The government has to keep an eye on the rule of laws established to ensure that the laws are useful.
However, the laws and written constitution are not self-executing which makes it challenging to apply this principle in a democratic government. The rule of law is sustained and given life by the government institutions. These institutions, the government agencies, courts, and congress are controlled by men and women who work in them and have remained committed to the rule of law. These institutions are threatened thus interfering with the rule of law.
The rule of law applies to everyone equally and no one is above the law (Hart and Green, 2012). A good example is when Donald Trump interrupted the Investigations of the FBI. The actions of Donald Trump raised questions on his commitment and respect to the rule of law as well as his understanding regarding his responsibility in assuring impartial and fair execution of laws. Law enforcement should not be used for personal benefits but the good of the people. When the laws are strictly adhered to and enforced, the country becomes democratic and the most transparent.
References
Raz, J. (2017). The rule of law and its virtue. The rule of law and the separation of powers (pp. 77-94). Routledge.
Hart, H. L. A., Hart, H. L. A., & Green, L. (2012). The concept of law. oxford university press.
