Tribunals and Guidelines: Exploring the Relationships between Fairness and Legitimacy in Administrative Decision-Making
The objective of this paper is to address two questions: why do administrative tribunals such as the Immigration Refugee Board resort to developing guidelines, and what are the principles and values which legitimize these initiatives? The role of tribunals in policy-making and/or policy-implementing raises important questions. For example, to whom are tribunals accountable for the development and application of guidelines where the functions of a tribunal - especially the adjudicative functions - are intended to be independent of government?The authors seek to understand better the dynamics of tribunals’ role in the policy process. They propose a classification of guidelines based on the function they perform in administrative proceedings and provide an analysis of the normative framework underlying guidelines. The authors explore how a legal analysis of guidelines might shed on the theory and practice of public administration. The authors conclude that in the absence of a nuanced understanding of the legal status of guidelines, the relationship between administrative practice and the rule of law remains uncertain and unstable.
Assessing the Promise and Performance of Agencies in the Government of Canada
Abstract Canada has not escaped trends in most liberal democracies with the rapid growth of agencies created by government to deliver public goods, often justified on elements of their mandate—service delivery, adjudication of disputes, regulatory oversight, among others—benefiting from an arm's-length relationship to the government of the day. Yet Canadian studies of this phenomenon remain mostly absent from the robust comparative literature theorizing and documenting the emergence of widespread “agencification” and its relationship to performance. This article draws on the Government of Canada's Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) microdata from 2017 to test key hypotheses advanced by proponents of agencification, specifically that agencies are more innovative, autonomous and efficient public organizations. We discover that those working in agencies generally report less climate of innovation and less work autonomy than those working in departments, though some types of agencies—namely regulatory and parliamentary ones—defy these trends.
The Internet and the Changing Beijing-Taipei Relations: Toward Unification or Fragmentation?
Information and its technologies facilitate the exercise of what has been called “soft power,” a concept that differentiates information from the conventional dimensions of “hard power,” which is mainly associated with military force and economic influence. Soft power, according to Nye, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense of the United States, means that “A country may obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries want to follow it, admiring its values, emulating its example, aspiring to its level of prosperity and openness. In this sense it is just as important to set the agenda in world politics and attract others as it is to force them to change through the threat or use of military or economic weapons.”1