ANALYSES ON LEGAL SYSTEMATIC ARRANGEMENT AND POLICE STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

Like any country carries out both foreign and domestic policy management, similarly administration also carries out internal and external operations and manages them with legal norms. From this, the internal administrative operation of the police organization and its legal management is directed towards ensuring the implementation of the law and improving operation results of its personnel and organizations. As the legal act systemization is also directed towards result improvement, hence I propose that it is of importance and demand to study the interconnection between them and utilization of it in practice.The purpose of this study is to show the results and differences from implementing legal techniques in the legal sector and establishment of legislative institutions, viewing legal act systemization technique as the theoretic foundation for systematic creation of the legal norm acts of the police organization’s internal operation rather than the narrow view of it as only legislation.

Stewardship in Large Public Projects: The Practicality of Shakespeare

Can reading great literature, considering its heroes and small characters, improve the performance of public sector actors? King Lear’s characters fault a wickedly disinterested heaven for life’s setbacks and woes. Yet Shakespeare makes clear that these actors’ own terrible choices beset the king, his family and the rest of us who are subject to the acts of public leaders. Reading this literature as analogy for the effectiveness of the modern public sector suggests how administrative operation of our democratic state may – or may not – successfully parcel power and control so as to limit negative externalities derived from ill-informed, self-serving or rent-seeking executive and individual decisions. Lear’s tragic arc mimics a sorrowful “muddling through” and potentially unnecessary “satisficing” in certain large public works projects. One large public project currently deemed successful is examined here – the replacement of the eastern span of the Bay Bridge in San Francisco – as a reflection on separated powers, the limits of human nature, and the inevitability of error.

Evaluation and the Salience of Infringement Data

The infringement process contained in Article 258 TFEU requires the Commission, as guardian of the treaties, to monitor the performance of member states in relation to the implementation and application of EU norms. As the Commission carries out this duty it amasses enormous amounts of data on the realisation of policy objectives through its discovery of (non) implementation of EU norms and the administrative operation of its ‘compliance promoting tools’. This article explores the Commission's duty as guardian of the treaties through the lens of smart regulation and examines the potential for infringement data, and the infringement process more widely, to play a contributory role in executing meaningful evaluation in the policy cycle. The article will explore the extent to which the Commission has included infringement data as part of its policy cycle and in particular the evaluation process. It considers the multiple dimensions of accountability and institutional learning associated with evaluations and how these might be supported by the infringement mechanism. It argues that the infringement process and evaluations can be considered symbiotic with each process contributing to the accountability and institutional learning of the other.

New Order and Good Government: Municipal Administration in Belgium, 1938–1946

The inefficient operation of state institutions – including municipal administration – lay at the heart of Belgium's crisis of legitimacy in the 1930s. In 1940, the German military occupation government opted to keep many of the existing administrative institutions and personnel in place. The collaborating political parties, Rex and the Vlaams Nationaal Verbond (VNV), possessed little legitimacy with either the Germans or the Belgian population. However, this article argues that both parties turned this to their advantage, infiltrating the Flemish municipal apparatus (especially mayors). Yet, as their political programme and legitimation was completely derived from the Germans, their legal position as administrators (especially mayors) was very weak. Both collaborating parties compensated for this with the theory of ‘good government’. Their takeover of power was an administrative operation which, the article argues, would bring them legitimacy through everyday ‘good government’. The entire ‘Neuordnung’ in Belgium in 1940–2 was strongly legitimised on administrative, not political grounds. The failure of this tactic lay in the open politicisation of collaborationist local government. As the article shows, the post-liberation authority also faced a problem of legitimacy. Generally speaking, the trauma of occupation had seemed to strengthen Belgians' wishes for the restoration of stability rather than reforms.