Wie löst man ein Problem wie den öffentlichen Dienst

n dismiss them at will, because the King can do no wrong.“ It is founded on the principle that the executive must have the ability to effectively carry out its functions and implement its policies. The civil service is not a separate entity from the executive, but an integral part of it. Therefore, decisions regarding the civil service, including changes to terms of service, are inherently political and should be subject to political oversight, not judicial review.

The third misconception in Lord Diplock’s speech is his assertion that the judiciary is “totally inept” to deal with national security issues. While it is true that the judiciary is not equipped to make decisions regarding specific national security measures, such as military operations or intelligence gathering, it is not true that the judiciary is incapable of reviewing the legality of executive actions in the national security realm. The judiciary has a crucial role to play in ensuring that the executive acts within the bounds of the law, even in matters of national security. This does not mean that the judiciary should second-guess the executive on matters of strategy or tactics, but it does mean that the judiciary should ensure that the executive is acting lawfully and in accordance with established legal principles.

In conclusion, while Lord Diplock’s judgment in the GCHQ case was correct in its outcome, his reasoning was flawed in several key respects. His failure to understand the fundamental differences between legislative and executive powers, his misunderstanding of the role of the civil service, and his dismissal of the judiciary’s role in reviewing executive actions all point to a lack of appreciation for the complexities of constitutional law and the separation of powers. The GCHQ case serves as a reminder that even the most learned judges can make mistakes, and that it is essential for the judiciary to remain vigilant in upholding the rule of law and protecting the rights of citizens

Original Artikel Teaser

How Do You Solve a Problem Like the Civil Service?

Across the developed world, it is increasingly common to hear people complaining about the existence of a ‘deep state’: an entrenched ‘permanent Government’ of civil servants, bureaucrats, quangocrats, regulators and so on who pursue their own agenda irrespective of (and often in flat opposition to) the policies of whatever democratically representative Government is in power. Nowadays the people who make this complaint tend to be on the political Right, and they often to talk in apocalyptic terms about the consequences of a Gramscian “long march through the institutions”’. For what it’s worth, the truth is I think both more mundane and more depressing than that; it is simply that anybody who has entered the civil service in the past 20

Details zu How Do You Solve a Problem Like the Civil Service?