Posted: November 16th, 2022

MGT 270. Principles of Public Sector Management

Principles of Public Sector Management

MGT 270. Principles of Public Sector Management

Assignment 2

In responding to the following questions, be sure to include material from the Slan text (Chapters 5-8). Also, feel free to supplement your answers with independent research (e.g., library or Internet research).

1. The United States and United Kingdom constitute two of the healthiest and most enduring democracies in the world. In both countries, the will of the people is captured effectively by their respective governments and leaders. Yet the approach to democracy is quite different in the USA and UK. Each of the following questions attempts to capture the differences in the two systems.

a. The US is led by a President, while the UK is led by a Prime Minister. How is the US President selected? How is the UK Prime Minister selected? (Half page response, single spaced)

b. The role of political parties is dramatically different in the USA and the UK. What is the role of political parties in the USA? What is their role in the parliamentary system? (One-half to one full-page response, single spaced)

c. How are cabinet members selected in the USA? How are Ministers selected in the UK? (One-half page response, single spaced)

d. In any democracy, the process of holding elections is important. What is the basis of holding national elections in the USA? What is the basis of holding national elections in the UK? (In answering these questions, take into account such things as the timing and frequency of elections, and what triggers the holding of elections) (One-half to one full-page response, single spaced)

2. One of the most important events that helped shape the role of the US Supreme Court in the early days of the republic was the practice of judicial review, whereby the Court could look at laws passed by legislative bodies to determine their constitutionality. The introduction of judicial review into the US is most closely associated with Justice John Marshall in respect to the Marbury vs. Madison case (1803).

a. Explain what judicial review entails. What makes it unique (e.g., the UK does not practice judicial review)? (One-half page response, single spaced)

b. How does the practice of judicial review strengthen the maintenance of separation of powers and checks and balances that are important traits of the US government system? (One-half to one full-page response, single spaced)

c. The judicial review process can lead to the charge that it enables the Courts to write law (which is supposed to be the function of Congress). Explain the rationale of such an argument. How can this work against the separation of powers? (One-half to one full-page response, single spaced)

d. How are Supreme Court justices selected in the USA? Contrast this with the way they are selected in Germany. (One-half to one full-page response, single spaced)

Principles of Public Sector Management
Question One
Selection of President and Prime Minister
The election process usually begins at the primary caucuses and elections, then a nomination for conventions is done, at this point each political party is given a chance to a nominee to support. At this time the nominee announces a Vice President as a running mate. The candidates are then given a chance to cross the country campaigning participating in debates with candidates from other parties and explaining their plans and views to the voters. The election is formal where the citizens registered to vote are given a chance to cast their vote in any of the fifty states. On Election Day the citizens head to the polls to select their favorite candidate. However, the popular votes don’t determine the winner instead the Presidential elections adopt the use of the Electoral College. For a candidate to be declared winner he or she must get a majority of electoral votes. In a scenario where no candidate was able garner majority, the Senate chooses the Vice President while the House of Representatives chooses the President.
In contrary, the selection of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is Informal. The public is given a chance to vote for their favorite member of parliament to represent their respective constituencies. The total number of Members of Parliament is six hundred and fifty. The political party that manages to get the highest number in the House of Commons will have their leader appointed as the Prime Minister. The other option would be for the party leaders form a coalition or lead a government of the minority. Whoever has the support of a majority of Members of Parliament gets to be the Prime Minister. It is also essential to note that the role of the monarch is purely constitutional; the Members of Parliament are free to pick their favorite. The selected Prime Minister becomes the head of the government.
Roles of political parties and Parliament
The political parties in the US have had a bad reputation from the beginning. The main roles of the political parties that is selecting candidates for elective positions in the US. The citizens would be overwhelmed by whom to choose if candidates had not partied- “labels”. They help narrow the field from several political wannabes to a few credible candidates thereby making in manageable. The parties present voters with a policy alternative. Other voters would even prefer a straight ticket, or candidates for a particular party for all positions during that election. The parties also have a duty to check on others. The party that lacks majority in the congress often keeps the ruling party in check to ensure that they deliver to the public. That is acting as a watchdog for the public. This party role comes to criticism of ‘partisanship’ since other Americans, feels that the ‘checking’ at times become self-serving and petty. Thirdly, parties are responsible for informing the public. This is by taking stands on issues and criticizes the viewpoint of other parties. Their discussions that are well publicized help in educating the citizens about significant issues and also present the society with alternative solutions to this problem.
The parties are also responsible for organizing the government. The state legislature and congress are structured according to party affiliations. This is because most legislators would support the position of their party’s when it comes to policies and laws. The voting pattern also falls along party lines. Practically all candidates run for public office with party labels that generally define how they will behave after winning the elections. Political parties also help in mobilizing voters. Political parties energize and inform their members. They run media campaigns,send out brochures, call voters on the phone and knock on doors. Even individu8als have the capabilities of doing the same, however, parties are able to keep up detailed networks of local and state offices. This can be easily pressed into service of the candidate immediately after securing the nominations for the party. In addition,the parties have the ability to finance their candidate campaigns. This is because they do have apparatuses for fundraising that makes the whole process simple.
In the UK parliament is composed of three central elements that is the Monarchy, the House of Lords and the House of Commons. The parliament has four main functions that is to challenge and check the work done by the government. This is through committee work, debating and questioning ministers hence scrutinizing the work of the government. The Lords and Members of Parliament get a chance to Question Assignment government ministers openly on the floor of the House during an ordinary oral inquiry time or in script. Debates in the House of Commons give an opportunity for the Members of Parliament to scrutinize the amendment and creation of laws as well as international and national issues. The debate may be on any subject. The MPs are free to vote in order to determine whether a majority of them either reject or support any debated proposals and laws. Moreover, through committees of smaller groups of Lords or MPs they are able to look at a given legislation or policy issue in detail. The committees have different functions ranging from altering legislation to producing reports and offering advice. Both Houses have temporary and permanent committees.
Secondly, they are responsible for changing and making laws. This is by finding how out how new laws are developed and the reason behind their making. The first step would be to draft a Bill and issue it out for consultation before introducing it formally to parliament. A proposal for a new law is referred to as the Bill or it may be a proposal to change an existing law. The Bill is presented in Parliament for debate where it is taken through several stages. If the Bill passes through all the stages of parliament, it becomes an Act of parliament. An Act of Parliament may make changes on an existing law or create a new law.if a Bill started in the House of Commons it will also have to go through the House of Lords. If the Bill sails through it will receive Royal Assent that will make it an Act of Parliament.
Thirdly, the parliament also has the role of debating the important issues of the day. Both parliament houses hold debates where members are given an opportunity to share their views on topical issues of the day, proposed new laws and government policies. It gives the MPs a chance to share the interest and concerns or their constituents. The members of the House of Lords can also articulate of issues brought to their awareness by the community. Generally, debates help the Lords and MPs reach an informed conclusion on the subject. This resolution is often uttered in a vote against or for.
Lastly, parliament has the role of approving and checking the government spending. Every year the Exchequer Chancellor presents the budget to the House of Commons. The Finance Bill is scrutinized by the MPs and they also debate the proposal, thereby changing them into law. The annual Finance Bill goes through the same parliamentary stages as any other Bill brought into parliament. But in case it is a money Bill the House of Lords is free to debate the Bill when it is still in its Second Reading. Although they are not allowed to make any changes in the Bill until it is formally introduced into the House of lords. The sum of public funds that each government sector such as Education, Transport, Health among others must get its endorsement from the House of Commons annually. The government presents her annual expenditure estimates to the House of Commons for endorsement. There exists a select committee of MPs in the House of Commons that monitors the work of each Government department. The committee has the responsibility of examining the annual expenditure plan for the concerned department and highlights any concerns. The committee members are free to question ministers and officials and try to make sure those communal funds is well used up. That it not barely delivers the preferred outcomes, nevertheless also do so in the most cost effective way. This is because resources are scare hence must be allocated efficiently to satisfy human wants. The House of Commons Scrutiny Unit helps the committee carry on this duty. The Public Accounts Committee is responsible for monitoring spending across all government departments. There target is to ensure that taxpayers get value for their money.
Selection of the Cabinet
In the US, the cabinet is made up of the most appointed senior officials of the executive branch. They are heads of the federal executive departments of the federal government of the United States. The cabinet has been in existence since the reign of George Washington who was the first President of United States. He appointed five people to his cabinet to Help him and advise him in executing out his duties as the US President. The President is responsible for nominating all the cabinet members. After the nomination list is presented to the Senate for rejection or confirmation by a simple majority. In case they are approved, they will begin their duties immediately after being sworn in. The members of the cabinet are given the title secretary and serve at the pleasure of the President; the President is free to reappoint them or dismiss at will. The salary of the cabinet is determined by the Title 5 of the United States Code. Apart from the officials appointed by the President, other officials that form the cabinet are the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Ambassador to the United States and the White House Chief of Staff. Others include; the U.S Trade Representative, the Administrator of the Small Business Administration, the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers and the Director of the Office of Management and budget.
Similarly, in the UK the Prime Minister is responsible for choosing the members that will make up the government. The Cabinet is majorly made up of senior government members. The Prime Minister has the role of choosing twenty-two cabinet members that are paid by the government. The cabinet members can be members of either House of Parliament. Some members will be responsible for heading departments in the government and they are also responsible for developing government policies. During Parliament every week, Cabinet members (all departments Secretaries of State and some other ministers) meet to share opinions on various issues affecting the government. Like all ministers, the Cabinet can be dismissed by the Monarch at pleasure whenever the Prime Minister advises so. The transfers and allocation between departments and ministers also lies in the Prime Minister’s discretion. The Prime Minister is the head of the Cabinet and chairs the Cabinet meetings.
Basis of holding national elections in US and UK
One of the federal republics in the world is the United States with with officials elected at the national (federal), local levels and the state. Through an Electoral College the people are given a chance to elect their president at the national level. All members that make up the Congress, the federal legislature are directly elected by the public. At the state level, there are several elected positions such as the legislative positions and the Governor. At the local level,there also exist positions and other levels, such as the villages, boroughs, townships, towns, cities and in counties. Most aspects of the election are regulated by state law, including the eligibility of voters, primaries, the running of local and state elections, and the running of each state’s electoral college. How federal elections should be held are clearly defined by the United States Constitution in Article Two and Article One several amendments.
Before general elections are done the political party’s are given a chance to hold primary elections in which registered supporters in an authority select a candidate of their own choice for a afterward election. There exist several types of primaries: first there is the open primary where the whole voting public is qualified, and the supporters select on one party’s key at the polling stand. The second one is the semi-closed primary where only the independent electorate can pick a party’s primary at the polling stand. The third one is known as the closed primary where only those registered with the party are eligible to vote. Those voters who are unaffiliated receive ballots for nonpartisan contests and other measures that take place on the same date. There is also the provision for an independent voter or candidate.
The other way of nominating a candidate is through a caucus. This refers to a meeting at the local level in a town, county or city between registered members of a given political party. They assemble as one to put across their support for candidates. For national and statewide offices, the recommendations are pooled to find out the contender for the state party. The term may possibly also be used to portray a gathering of nominated officials with a general goal that meets to graph procedure in support of a mutual political outline. The commonly known groups in the United States are groups such as the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus. Their members advance and discuss their respective constituent’s interests.
In several states the Secretary of state is the chief election officer. In other states,local officials such as Superisor of Elections or county Registar of Voters manages the elections conduct beneath the administration or in organization with the principal elections administrator of the state.
In the United United States elections are held after every four years. The Election Day is usually the first Tuesday in November after the first Monday, for instance the 2016 Presidential elections will be conducted on November eighth, two thousand and sixteen. The elections are generally conducted after every four years since according to the constitution the terms of any elected official expire after four years. The election process begins in the spring year of the election up to January twentieth the following year when Inauguration is done.
Contrary to US in the United Kingdom elections are done after every five years. This was adopted after parliament enacted the Fixed-term Parliament Act 2011. In addition, in the UK elections are done every first Thursday in May of the election year. This usually done following Parliament dissolution . during election all the Members of Parliament that will be part of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom Parliament are chosen. The only way an early election can be done is through a vote by a House majority. According to the Act, dissolution takes places automatically twenty five working days prior to the voting. All parliamentary business is brought to an end at this particular juncture and the MPs role ceases to exist until the polling has been done.
Political parties will select candidates for each constituency or one can vie as an independent candidate. However, majority of successful candidates are affiliated to a given political party. For instance, during the two thousand and ten general elections only one independent candidate happened to be successful. A party that manages to have an overall majority in the parliamentary seats after an election will be given an opportunity to form the government. Parties are allowed to form a coalition in case to party manages to garner an outright majority. The biggest party that is not in government makes up Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.
Before any parliamentary period began a general election must be held. Since five years is the upper limit era for every parliament, the gap between consecutive general elections can go beyond that time with no further that the collective time-span of the voting campaign. This means that the time for the new parliament to assemble is typically around four weeks. It is also important to note that the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 contains the prerequisite for the legislature to be dissolved and an untimely voting held in case no administration can be created in fourteen days subsequent to a vote of no confidence in the regime. Similarly, the Act gives provision for a voting to be triggered by a ballot of two-thirds of Members of assembly in the House of Commons vocation for one.
In the United Kingdom there are six types of elections: elections to devolved assemblies and parliaments, United Kingdom general elections, local elections, elections to the European Parliament, Crime and Police Commissioner and mayoral elections. All elections are held on Election Day. This was adopted after the passing of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 that fixed all the three types of elections on the same day. Six electoral systems are used currently, that is the supplementary vote, the additional member system, the single transferable vote. Others include the party-list proportional representation, the multi member plurality system and the single member plurality system.
Administration of elections is usually done locally; in every lower-tier local authority, the Returning officer or Acting Returning Officer is responsible for running the polling procedure. They are also responsible for maintenance and compiling of the electoral roll, which is done by the Electoral Registration Officer. But for Northern Ireland the responsibilities are assumed by the Electoral Office of Northern Ireland. The role of the Electoral Commission is to issue guidelines and set standards for the Electoral Registration Officers and the Returning Officers. But it is accountable for the countrywide electoral organization, for instance, directing the running of national referendums and listing of political parties.
Question two
Judicial Review
Judicial review refers to the power given to the courts of law to appraise the dealings of the legislative and executive branches. The United States Supreme Court is the known court associated with judicial review, and they also have decisive judicial power. This authority is possessed by a good number state and federal courts of law in the United states. This concept is an American invention. Before the 1800s, there was no known nation in the world that vested such authority in their judicial branch.
The United States constitution establishes the national law supremacy by Clause 2, Article VI. It is commonly known as the Supremacy Clause. It states that “ This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof… shall be the supreme law of the land.” It also continues by saying that, “judges in very state shall be bound thereby.” The meaning of this is that the state laws are not free to breach the constitution of the United States and that it is the responsibility of state courts to uphold the national law. It is through judicial review that the state courts are able to defend the national law.
With the help of judicial review, the state courts are in a position to determine the validity of state statutes or the acts of the state executive. When making such a ruling the courts base their arguments on the principle that any law made by the state that is in contrary to the United States constitution should be considered invalid. Under the state constitution, they are also able to determine the state law’s constitutionality. However, if there is a scenario where the constitutions of the state clashes with the constitution of the United States, or any other public statute, the constitution of the state have to capitulate. The state Supreme Court is the highest court that is allowed to make a decision on such issues.
In addition, the supremacy clause clearly outlines the state laws, judicial review, the United States constitution framers failed to steadfastness the matter of whether the national courts ought to have this supremacy over executive acts and congressional. At some point in the early years of the Republic, the Supreme Court upholds congressional acts, which oblique the power of judicial review. But the main question was whether the Court had the authority to clout down Congress act.
However, this issue was settled in 1803 in Marbury V. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 2 L. Ed. 60, when for the first time the Supreme Court, ruled that an act that was made by the Congress to be unconstitutional. The Chief Justice in Marbury was of the opinion that because it is the role of the court in a court case to affirm the law, and given that the Supreme law of the land is the Constitution, a case where a decree of legal law conflicts with a statute of the Constitution, then the law of the Constitution have got to prevail. The Chief Justice also asserted that it is “definitely the area and responsibility of the legal department, to say what the decree is”.
Separation of powers
The doctrine of separation of powers means that some given functions, responsibilities and duties are allocated to a distinct institution by means of a definite means of jurisdiction and competence. This separation involves three main government spheres, that is the Judiciary, the Executive and the Legislature. The judiciary has the judicial authority which refers to the power to determine how the application of the law should be done and what the law is in the given scenario that is during the dispute. The executive authority refers to the power to enforce and execute rules of law. Lastly, the legislative authority is the power to amend, repeal and make rules of law. Generally, the separation of powers doctrine means that if one of the three government spheres is accountable for the ratification of a set of laws, then that organization shall not as well be charged with their implementation or with legal decision regarding them. The same will be applied when it comes to the executive authority, that are not allowed to administer justice, or enact laws and the judicial authority is also not responsible for executing or enacting laws.
The United States is one the nations whose constitution is premised on the division of rule doctrine, according to which present an institutional partition among the executive and the legislature. This gave rise to the presidential form of regime with balances and checks. The doctrine of separation of powers was established when the American Constitution was ratified. This edition may be subdivided into two basics of splitting up encompassed through the ideology of trias politica, that is to say, the separation of personnel and the separation of functions. This helped ensure that no one group or person was in a position to provide services for more than a single branch simultaneously. The Constitution was able to effectuate these principles to a larger extent, but this was objected by critics who viewed it as a probing intermixture of roles. For instance, the President has the veto power above legislation and to the function of the Senate in the selection of judges and executive officers and in the process of making treaties. On the other hand the principle of balances and checks is encompassed on the independence element.
Judicial review may be understood in the perspective of two distinct but comparable common law, civil law and legal systems. It can be understood in two distinct theories on how and government should be formed and democracy, separation of powers and legislative supremacy. Judges of common law are viewed as the sources of law, capable of rejecting legal rules that they consider no longer valid and creating new rules. The judicial review has been considered unique since the judiciary or the court is given the authority to create a balance among the government branches and to provide checks and balances. In the tradition of civil-law, judges are viewed as those whose responsibility is to ensure that the law is applied. They are also considered to possess no power to destroy or create legal principles. The common law and the civil law which are the two known distinct legal systems do not share the same opinion on judicial review.
The judicial review practice can help strengthen the maintenance of checks and balances and separation of power. State courts have the authority to determine whether or not state statutes or executive acts are valid through the judicial review. It is also important to note that the court is not actually concerned with the conclusions of the process and if they were right as long as the necessary procedures were followed. This means that the public is allowed to make the same decision over and over again as long as it follows the law. Decisions that may fall in the judicial review include; decisions by regulatory bodies, decision regarding the rights of a prisoner, local authority’s decision when exercising their duties. They also handle decisions of the immigration authorities and the Asylum and Immigration Chamber. For instance, the Congress is responsible for making laws which the Executive is responsible for implementing. The judiciary is able to provide checks and balances by determining which laws the Congress intended to apply in any given case.
It is also important to note that the common law is in existence in the United Kingdom, although the nation still has well-built attachment to the ideology of legislative supremacy. Similarly, the United Kingdom judges do not have the authority to strike down any crucial legislation.
How the court may be able to write a law
The judicial review is majorly concerned with the process of decision making instead of the decision’s substance. The review, however, has a limited scope of the decision’s substance. There exist two major categories of judicial review that is Statutory judicial review and the Conventional judicial review. The Statutory judicial review refers to a specialized legislative scheme of legal review. This relates to given areas of community managerial which have been picked out by the Oireachtas as warranting particular schemes due to the involved policy concerns. The legislation in a given area covers the more involved procedures and the statutory schemes. The areas that statutory schemes may be applied include; the takeover of companies, planning, control, pollution and asylum. The conventional judicial review refers to the procedure regulating judicial review conventional that is normally found in Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts.
There are two doctrines that have been variously characterized, that is the functional which refers to the less strict and the formalist which was applied to the more strict. The formalist approach states the need to have three separate government branches by drawing of clear lines demarcating the three branches for each one of them by the distinction between adjudicating, executing and legislating. The emphasis of the core functions for every branch as mentioned by the functional approach. It also questions whether the action that has been challenged is in a position to threaten the main attributes of the judicial, executive and legislative functions. The moving branch is able to exercise flexibility under this approach. Normally the Congress may act to make an institutional or structural change, in a scenario where such a risk exists and compels the action or there is a potential impairment risk of any function that is core.
The formalist approach was applied by Chadha to quash the lawmaking veto piece of equipment by which Congress may possibly place aside a resolution by the Attorney General. Pursuant to an assignment from Congress to suspend alien deportation. There were two conceptual premises that were central to this decision. To begin, the decision that was taken by the Congress was considering legislation. This is because it possessed the effect and purpose of changing the legal duties, relations and rights of those not within the Legislative Branch, hence the Congress had limited options but to agree with the presentment and bicameralism commands of the Constitution. Secondly, by executing the directive from from the Congress the Attorney General was already performing the function of the executive, and the lawmaking veto was an impermissible intrusion in the effecting of the laws. The only way the Congress could act was by legislating, by altering the conditions of its assignment.
Some nations do not allow an Assessment of the legality of most important legislation. For instance, in the UK, under the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty statutes cannot be set aside. The Netherlands is also a good example where the court is prohibited by the constitution from questioning primary legislation’s constitutionality. This is contrary in the United States where the court is allowed to review the legality of any law passed by the Congress. The court may at times re-write a law despite the separation of powers, for instance, in a case where some clauses in the new law are not recommended by the constitution. The court can be able to suggest the correct wording that may make the law constitutional hence making the law in the process.
Selection of Supreme Court justices
In the US appointment of Supreme Court Justices involves several steps that have been set by the constitution. The President is normally responsible for nominating the candidates. The main challenge has been that the Constitution is quite when it comes to judicial qualifications. Meticulously, it outlines the required qualifications for the Senate, the Presidency and the House of Representatives ,but does not give any directive on judicial appointments. It only states that justices are required to show or have a good behavior. Although, when nominating a candidate the President considers experience that is they should have substantial governmental or judicial experience, either on the federal or state level. Majority does have higher education or law degrees. Presidents also nominate those candidates that share the same political ideology as he. For instance, a president with an ideology that is liberal will just select liberals to the bar. Another considered issue is personal and party loyalties. Generally,the majority of the nominees will come from the president’s party. Currently, gender and ethnicity are also considered during the nomination.
After the nomination the candidates are subjected to a number of hearings in which both the witnesses and the nominee make statements while answering questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee is free to vote on sending the full nomination list to the Senate. After the voting the nomination must be taken to the Senate with a neutral, negative or positive report. Once the committee has presented their nomination report, the Senate as a whole will look at it. The nominee may be rejected or confirmed by a simple majority vote. But a flourishing filibuster danger possibly will add the condition of a very good majority of sixty desired in support of cloture, which would permit contest to end and compel a final ballot on the authorization. Rejections are generally not common. The President can only formally appoint a candidate to court after confirmation from the Senate.
New justices may be appointed any time the is vacuum left in the court. The Constitution gives provision that justices should occupy offices during good behavior except selected for the duration of a Senate recess. The term good behavior is used to mean that the justices do serve for the remaining parts of their lives unless one retire or resign voluntarily. The other option of removing a Justice will be through conviction and impeachment by the Congress. Presently, there is no mechanism for removing a Justice who is incapacitated permanently by injury or illness, both unable to resume duties or resign.
Germany has only one supreme court that is entirely for legal questions, that is the German Federal Constitutional Court and additional five supreme federal courts that deals with other areas of the Constitution. They include; Federal Fiscal Court, Federal Social Court, the Federal Labour Court, Federal Administrative Court and the Federal Court of Justice. There are two chambers in the Federal Constitutional Court that are known as senates. Eight justices make up each senate. For one to eligible for an appointment to the Bundestag they must be at least forty years of age. He or she must also state in writing that they wish to be members of the Federal Constitutional Court. In accordance with the German Judiciary Act to be deemed qualified for any judicial position one must have finished a legal education.
In contrast, in Germany the Bundestag is responsible for choosing the justices. An election committee is formed specifically for this purpose and voting is done through secret ballot. The parliamentary groups propose a list of candidates from the Bundestag and only twelve will be chosen by the election committee. To be elected, a justice must garner two-third of the votes cast and at least a majority amongst the Bundestag members.
Apart from the votes of the electoral committee being done through a secret ballot, their swearing in is also done to confidentiality. They are not permitted to reveal the personal circumstances of the candidates, which will become known to them since they are working on the committee. This may also be through votes ,casting and discussion on the issue with the committee. Once a justice is selected, she or he will be chosen by the Federal President.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: MGT 270. Principles of Public Sector Management