Good Governance

Author(s):  
Henk Addink

The pivotal aim of this book is to explain the creation, development, and impact of good governance from a conceptual, principal perspective and in the context of national administrative law. Three lines of reasoning have been worked out: developing the concept of good governance; specification of this concept by developing principles of good governance; and implementation of these principles of good governance on the national level. In this phase of further development of good governance, it is important to have a clear concept of good governance, presented in this book as the third cornerstone of a modern state, alongside the concepts of the rule of law and democracy. That is a rather new national administrative law perspective which is influenced by regional and international legal developments; thus, we can speak about good governance as a multilevel concept. But the question is: how is this concept of good governance further developed? Six principles of good governance (which in a narrower sense also qualify as principles of good administration) have been further specified in a systematic way, from a legal perspective. These are the principles of properness, transparency, participation, effectiveness, accountability, and human rights. Furthermore, the link has been made with integrity standards. The important developments of each of these principles are described on the national level in Europe, but also in countries outside Europe (such as Australia, Canada, and South Africa). This book gives a systematic comparison of the implementation of the principles of good governance between countries.

2019 ◽  
pp. 209-242
Author(s):  
Henk Addink

In this chapter, the focus is on the implementation of good governance norms in three countries outside Europe: Australia, Canada, and South Africa. Relating to the implementation of the good governance principles in Australia, we start with the historical background and good governance approaches in the country. There is a classical rule of law and separation of powers but also new administrative law reforms and including the position of the fourth power. Important is the role of the Ombudsman and the relation between good governance and human rights. Especially the principles of participation, transparency and accountability have been worked out. The idea of integrity goes beyond matters of simple ‘legality’. Important is the influx of integrity commissions, ombudsmen and means of judicial and merit review. Although Canada does not have specific legislation that explicitly outlines good governance principles, it is clear that Canada has put them into practice. The Constitution guarantees Canadian citizens ‘peace, order, and good government’. The rule of law provides that every person must abide by the law and Section 15 guarantees equality rights to Canadian citizens. The judiciary is also a source for good governance. Finally, administrative officials are held accountable by judicial review, section 24 of the Charter, and with the ombudsmen. Nevertheless, there is still room for improvement. South Africa has extensively integrated good governance principles into its legal system, but faces the same problems that other developing countries in Africa have. Thus, although South Africa has a sound legal foundation for good governance, lessons can still be learned on how to translate these legal norms into practical application.


2019 ◽  
pp. 15-24
Author(s):  
Henk Addink

Good governance is needed because of legislative gaps, prevention of corruption, maladministration, and mismanagement, and fragmentation of administrative law norms. The concept of good governance has been developed in addition to aspects which can already be found in the rule of law and democracy concepts but are also related to the institutional framework of the government. The term ‘government’ is used for all the powers in the state; the administration is only one of these powers. These powers must fulfil certain norms, principles which sometimes are unwritten and developed by the judiciary or the ombudsman but more and more codified in the frame of the general (administrative) legislation. All the institutions of the government are involved in the development of these principles of good governance. There is not only a separation between the powers of the state, but more and more there are interactions between these powers in the development of principles of good governance and, hence, there is a balance between these principles. Therefore, there are different producers and sources of good governance.


Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Radley Henrico

The rule of law is expressly mentioned in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The principle of legality has flourished in South African administrative law since its recognition and reception into our law in Fedsure Life Assurance Ltd v Greater Johannesburg Transitional Metropolitan Council 1999 (1) SA 374 (CC). The Indian Constitution does not contain an equivalent expression of the rule of law. Notably, how persons and societies in India govern themselves is premised upon beliefs akin to the rule of law. Moreover, Indian administrative law has been strongly influenced by the theory of the rule of law as advocated by Dicey. Whilst Indian administrative law relies heavily upon the rule of law to judicially review conduct that is capricious, South African administrative law has come to rely on the incident of the rule of law, namely the principle of legality. This contribution inspects some of the reasons why the rule of law is heavily relied on in Indian administrative law – where it essentially mirrors the South African administrative law principle of legality. This contribution also suggests reasons as to why the principle of legality is so prevalent in South African administrative law as opposed to merely the rule of law as employed by the Indian courts in Indian administrative law.


2005 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-168
Author(s):  
Zein Kebonang

In 2002 at the inaugural Summit of the African Union (AU) held in Durban, South Africa, the African Heads of State and Government committed themselves to adhere to international standards on democracy, good governance (political, economic and corporate), peace, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. They also agreed to hold each other accountable through African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). The present paper examines whether the APRM constitutes a viable peer review mechanism; and, if not, how it can be strengthened?


Author(s):  
W. Andy Knight

This chapter examines the UN’s role in promoting and encouraging democracy and good governance. The world organizations is in a pivotal position to help promote and strengthen the global norm that posits that democracy validates the quality of governance today. In order to be considered ‘democratic,’ governments should not only hold periodic free and fair elections and demonstrate the ability to govern inclusively and humanely. In addition, they should also respect human rights and the rule of law. Concurrently, the chapter argues that the UN should practice what it preaches and address its own democratic deficit, even as it helps to strengthen democracy at the national level.


2019 ◽  
pp. 200-208
Author(s):  
Henk Addink

The implementation of good governance in the EU member states was investigated (by interpretation and application), considering the different functions of government bodies. Good governance as a pivotal public value in each of the member states has fundamental roots in the different phases of European history. In these phases we find aspects of the rule of law, democracy, and the institutional state developing and becoming natural dimensions of good governance, a common public value for European states. The outcome was that good governance norms developed in the member states sometimes in a general, abstract way, such as the concept of the rule of law, the notion of democracy, and the classical framework of constitutional institutions. There is, however, a tendency to specify these general dimensions of the good governance concept through principles, in some countries more than others. A principles-based development of policies in the member states was discovered, which is the key to good governance in these states. In different legal forms—constitutions, laws, policy papers, case law, and reports of ombudsmen and audit institutions—are the six specific aspects of the theoretical framework pertaining to Europe. These principles have been developed as legal principles by the (four) powers in the states of Europe, both as norms for the administration, as well as rights for citizens.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-104
Author(s):  
Rustam Magun Pikahulan

Abstract: The Plato's conception of the rule of law states that good governance is based on good law. The organization also spreads to the world of Supreme Court justices, the election caused a decadence to the institutional status of the House of Representatives as a people's representative in the government whose implementation was not in line with the decision of the Constitutional Court. Based on the decision of the Constitutional Court No.27/PUU-XI/2013 explains that the House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only approve or disapprove candidates for Supreme Court Justices that have been submitted by the Judicial Commission. In addition, the proportion of proposed Supreme Court Justices from the judicial commission to the House of Representatives (DPR) has changed, whereas previously the Judicial Commission had to propose 3 (three) of each vacancy for the Justices, now it is only one of each vacant for Supreme Court Judges. by the Supreme Court. The House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only "approve" or "disagree" the Supreme Judge candidates nominated by the Judicial Commission.


Politeia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mbekezeli Comfort Mkhize ◽  
Kongko Louis Makau

This article argues that the 2015 xenophobic violence was allowed to spread due to persistent inaction by state officials. While the utterances of King Goodwill Zwelithini have in part fuelled the attacks, officials tend to perceive acts of xenophobia as ordinary crimes. This perception has resulted in ill-advised responses from the authorities, allowing this kind of hate crime against foreign nationals to engulf the whole country. In comparison with similar attacks in 2008, the violent spree in 2015 is characterised by a stronger surge in criminal activities. The militancy showcased fed a sense of insecurity amongst foreigners, creating a situation inconsistent with the country’s vaunted respect for human rights and the rule of law. Investors lost confidence in the country’s outlook, owing in part to determined denialism in government circles regarding the targeting of foreigners. While drawing from existing debates, the article’s principal objective is to critically examine the structural problems that enable xenophobia to proliferate and the (in)effectiveness of responses to the militancy involved in the 2015 attacks. Of particular interest are the suggested responses that could be effective in curbing future violence. The article concludes that xenophobia is systemic in post-apartheid South Africa. Strong cooperation between the government, national and international organisations could provide the basis for successful anti-xenophobia measures. The article further argues that the country is obliged to find a sustainable solution to the predicament for humanitarian reasons firstly, and in recognition of the support South Africans received from its African counterparts during the liberation struggle.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document