Bureaucracy

and Control
UNIT 6 CONTROL MECHANISM OVER
Mechanism over ADMINISTRATION*
Administration
Structure
6.0 Objectives

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Control over Administration: Need and Significance

6.3 Control Mechanism

6.3.1 Executive Control
6.3.2 Legislative Control
6.3.3 Judicial Control

6.4. Control Mechanism over Administration in Brazil

6.5 Control Mechanism over Administration in Russia

6.6 Control Mechanism over Administration in India

6.7 Control Mechanism over Administration in China

6.8 Control Mechanism over Administration in South Africa

6.9 Conclusion

6.10 Glossary

6.11 References

6.12 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises

6.0 OBJECTIVES
After studying this Unit, you should be able to:
● Discuss the significance of control over administration;

● Explain and classify the methods of control over administration;

● Describe the system of control over administration in BRICS countries;

and

● Examine and Compare the nature and extent of control over administration
in BRICS.

98 * Contributed by Prof. Swinder Singh, USOL, Panjab University, Chandigarh.

6.1 INTRODUCTION Control Mechanism
over Administration
In the previous Unit, we have discussed the role of bureaucracy in the policy-
making, implementation and analysis. As a student of Public Administration,
you can appreciate the significance of administrative machinery and its utility
for the country’s governance. However, you can also appreciate the fact that
alongside the vast functions and powers of the administrative authorities there
is also a need for a system of control over administration so as to protect the
interests of a common man and that of the State. In this Unit, we will focus on
the need and significance of control over administration; and control mechanism
in each of the BRICS countries.

6.2 CONTROL OVER ADMINISTRATION: NEED

AND SIGNIFICANCE
Accountability is the basic objective of a democratic government. Democratic
theory provides that power emanates from the people and is to be exercised
in the interest of the people. Within the government, each level of executive
authority is accountable to the next, running up to the top level. Even in
the non-democratic set ups, the basic principles of management requires a
system of accountability and control. In the modern day government, with the
enormous expansion of public services, there has been a thorough expansion
of administrative machinery. This process has also resulted in the increase
of powers and discretion of their respective executives. In fact, the executive
inclusive of bureaucracy may well be said to be the most powerful organ of
the government. Where there are powers and discretions, there is always the
possibility that powers and discretions may be abused to serve personal, or
vested interests. In the views of Robert Mlewald and Nigro, following are the
common bureaucratic sins: the arrogance of high office; political involvement;
corruption; dishonesty; unethical behaviour; disregard of the law; favouritism;
unfair treatment of employees; gross inefficiency; covering up mistakes; failure
to respect legislative intent; ignoring procedures; manipulation of information;
and failure to show initiative. Therefore, it is necessary to devise adequate
methods of control over the administrative discretion so that the chances of
maladministration and corruption arising out of its misuse are considerably
reduced. In the words of L.D. White, “It is obvious that an administrative system
is an agency possessing great power ... power in a democratic society requires
control and the greater the power the more is the need for control. How to vest
power sufficient to the purposes in view and maintain adequate controls without
crippling authority is one of the historic dilemmas of a popular government”.

The exercise control over administration is, thus, an organisational imperative

because, first and foremost, it purports to evaluate its performance in terms
of its goals. In other words, it seeks to ensure optimisation of the available
resources and at the same time to realise the organisational objectives. Also, it
is a feature, which distinguishes public administration in a democratic set up as
against that in an autocratic set up. An autocrat is accountable to none whereas
99
Bureaucracy in a democracy the public administrative authorities are in the ultimate analysis,
and Control accountable to the people.
Mechanism over
Administration

6.3 CONTROL MECHANISM

There are various ways by which control is exercised over the administration.
However, the system of control may be broadly divided into - internal control
and external control. The internal control is exercised by using the inbuilt
mechanism within the administration (executive) and the external control is
exercised through the legislature, judiciary or other independent investigating
bodies such as Ombudsman or Lokpal. Here, we can briefly discuss the control
mechanism under the broad heads - executive control, legislative control and
judicial control.

6.3.1 Executive Control

Administration in any country is subject to immediate control (or at the first
instance) by the executive. The executive holds the public agencies accountable
for how they carry out their responsibilities. This is possible through the
internal controls workable in every section, branch and department of public
administration, which are adjusted into administrative hierarchy like brakes in
an automobile. Executive control may be discussed under the following heads:

i) Political Direction: The administration in a democratic state is

accountable to the political executive in the first instance, the Chief
executive, which in the parliamentary form of government, is the Cabinet
that performs both political as well as administrative functions. It exercises
supreme control over the executive in accordance with the intent of the
legislature. A particular Minister has full authority to manage and direct
her/his department, and all civil servants working in that department are
accountable to her/him.

ii) Routine Control and Directions: Administrative agencies in their routine

or day to day working are looked after by the head of the department—the
Secretary ‘who, being a permanent civil servant, is able to exercise more
effective control over the departmental machinery. Besides, hierarchy is
itself an accountability fixation exercise. Without adequate control and
supervision over the actions of the lower levels, accountability can hardly
be enforced. In the hierarchical structure of administration, one controls
and supervises the work of the other, thus, none is outside the chain of
command. There is always a fear of reprimand, loss of superior’s favour,
loss of increment, and fear of demotion and dismissal. It is an accepted
principle of Secretariat procedure that each paper must pass through the
proper authorised channel, that is, both in its outward-inward, and upward-
downward journey. This provides an automatic control mechanism.

iii) Control over Personnel: Controlling or managing personnel provides

another set of tools of internal control over administration. The growing
100 significance of personnel management results from the increase in the
 knowledge required to handle successfully the staffing needs and human Control Mechanism
problems of large organisation. Similar to the central finance agency, a over Administration
central personnel agency exercise centralised control over the personnel
matters.

iv) Financial Management and Control: Finance is the key component

to control any administrative organisation. The financial control by the
executive could be exercised when estimates are prepared and expenditure
is incurred. The heads of subordinate agencies scruitinise expenditure
proposals emanating from within, in terms of their needs and spending
capacity. This process moves upward to the heads of the departments who
are expected to moderate the estimate in the light of accepted policies
of the government. The system of financial control through budgeting,
auditing and other instruments vary from country to country.

v) Performance Evaluation and Efficiency Surveys: Apart from the day to

day control, the work of the public officials is also assessed periodically
and noted in their annual confidential reports (ACRs). The ACRs do
affect future career of civil servants and hence do act as an important
instrument of holding them accountable. Inspection has always been
an effective method of control on public business particularly in a wide
spread organisation. The officers from the headquarters go on inspection
to ensure that reasonable levels of efficiency are being achieved by the
field establishments. If scientific and objective standards of efficiency
measurement are employed, the system of efficiency survey becomes
extremely useful. In USA, the efficiency rating is a regular part of
personnel management. In India, there are (Organisation & Management)
units in all the departments and bigger offices of the Union and the State
governments and even in some larger local authorities.

Internal control over administrative officials is also exercised by the way

of rules, regulations and procedures to be followed. Besides, there are
conduct rules to be followed by the officials and there is also a system
in most of the countries in regard to disciplinary proceedings against the
erring officials.

6.3.2 Legislative Control

Exercising direct or indirect control over administration is one of the prime
functions of modern day legislature. In most of the countries, the legislative
control is more effective as compared to other types of control. Defining the
broad objectives of administration and providing the funds necessary to achieve
them are considered as the real instrument of control. In a democratic set up,
administration is ultimately accountable to the legislature. Routine activities or
bureaucracy are also open to the legislative scrutiny through various methods. The
practice of legislative control has been subject to two different interpretations. It
may mean a general political control or a detailed examination of governmental
activities. The general political control implies that the legislature has a right
to express its agreement or disagreement with the way the government intends
to orient or has oriented its activities. In this model, the Parliament exercises 101
Bureaucracy control through the Cabinet. The second interpretation involves the detailed
and Control examination of government activities, which may cover both preliminary
Mechanism over
intervention, i.e., before a policy is adopted, and ex-post facto scrutiny, i.e.,
Administration
before a policy has been implemented. It is the second type of control, which
is worth consideration and is the true or effective control. In most of the
countries, the legislative control over administration is exercised by the way
of passing laws in regard to setting up of certain administrative organisations,
assigning them functions through the legislations, passing of the new policies
and reviewing of the existing policies, including those relating to administrative
set up, reviewing of the working of various departments/organisations through
debates/discussions or through the legislative committees. One of the most
important tools with the legislatures for controlling the administration is the
budget. In of the most countries, the budget necessarily requires the legislative
approval. Along with the budget, audit is considered as an extended arm of
legislature, which is a very effective tool of control.

6.3.3 Judicial Control

The significance of judicial control has immensely increased in modern period.
It has assumed the role of guardian of citizen’s rights. It has been rightly pointed
out by Lord Jhon Sankey, “Amid the cross-current and shifting stands of public
life, the law is like a great rock upon which man may be safe; and the inequities
of private life are not so dangerous in a country where every citizen knows
that in law courts, at any rate, he can get justice”. While every legislative and
executive control over administration are meant for policy and controlling the
expenditure of the government, the judicial control over administration ensures
the legality of the official’s act and thereby, protects the essential rights of
the citizens. In fact, the significance of judicial control has increased in the
wake of increasing discretionary powers of the civil servants. Ernest Freud
has rightly remarked, “Increased administrative powers call for increased
safeguard against their abuses and as long as there is the possibility of official
error, partiality or excess of zeal, the protection of private right is an important
object as the effectuation of some fundamental policy”. Some common grounds
for the judicial review of administrative actions are:
i) When administrative authority lacks jurisdiction or when the administrator
is incompetent (legally) to hold the post;

ii) When there is some error or violation of required procedure;

iii) When there is a clear violation of law/rules, regulations;

iv) When there is error of facts findings on the basis of which the decision/
action of administration is taken;

v) When there is violation of spirit of the Constitution or law;

vi) When there is a violation of rules of natural justice by the administrative

authorities, during adjudication; and

102 vii) When the administrative action is of suppressive nature or injustice.

6.4 CONTROL MECHANISM OVER Control Mechanism
over Administration
ADMINISTRATION IN BRAZIL
As noted in the previous units, Brazil is a Presidential Federal Republic
composed of Union, States, Federal District and municipalities in which the
exercise of power is attributed to distinct and independent organs that are
subject to a system of balances to guarantee a compliance with the legislation
and the Constitution. As usual, there are three broad wings of the Union
government — legislature, executive and judiciary. The legislature is composed
of the Chamber of Deputies and Senate. The Federal Court of Accounts is also
part of the legislature, and is responsible for the control and monitoring of the
public administration. The executive branch is composed of ministries, which
are responsible for formulation, implementation and monitoring of public
policies at the federal level. There are special secretariats, autarchies, regulatory
agencies and councils, which constitute the part of executive and control the
administration in different ways.

The Judiciary in Brazil is constituted of Federal Supreme Court, Superior Court

of Justice as well as Regional Tribunals, Labour Courts, Election Courts, Military
Courts and some specialised Courts and Tribunals. The judiciary functions in
order to guarantee individual, collective and social rights and resolve conflicts
between citizens and administration (State).

Like most of the other countries, Brazil has a system and mechanism to control
the working of administrative authorities. According to the Transparency
International, Brazil faces some challenging problems. Its ranking in Corruption
Perceptions Index is 94, i.e., low in the scale of zero (highly corrupt) to ten
(highly clean) (Transparency International, 2020). The problems include
nepotism, administrative corruption, political appointments, and inefficiency so
on so forth. All this, asks for an effective system of control over administration.
Broadly, there is a system of legislative control, executive control and judicial
control over administration in Brazil.

The legislature exercises general control over administration through the law-
making process, and debates and discussions on the working of administration.
It discusses various proposals of executive and may ask for the information
and reports on various activities of administration. The Tribunal de Contas da
União (TCU), Federal Court of Accounts, is an extended arm of the Legislature
and is a Constitutional body. It is constituted of Minister, members appointed
by the Chamber of Deputies, the Senate and the President. The TCU exercises
control over administration and supports good governance through a “clean,
transparent and accountable administration”. It assures itself regarding clarity
of the budget, the whole accounting process, and its operations and assets. It
also makes an assessment regarding the implementation process of the federal
budget and all the operations using federal government resources, and to
ascertain their conformity with the Constitutional norms, laws and all the rules
and regulations. The TCU works as an independent body to ensure that the
government is held accountable for the management of public resources in a
103
Bureaucracy way to ensure economic, effective and efficient use of tax payers’ money. Studies
and Control have indicated that the active working of TCU has resulted in better results
Mechanism over
towards checking of corruption and assuring transparency, accountability and
Administration
inclusiveness in the governance.

The executive control over administration, in Brazil, is exercised within the

administration through routine administrative control through hierarchical set
up, personnel administration, performance appraisal system, rules/regulations
and also through a number of special regulatory agencies. The President of
Brazil, may, by way of special laws, create, modify the structure and abolish
certain organisations including the ministries and secretariats. The ministries
are responsible to control their administrative organisations for the smooth
carrying out of policies and programmes. They are also responsible for
establishing strategies, guidelines, and priorities for the use of public resources
by the administrative authorities, by creating standards and monitoring and
evaluating federal programmes. The government also has special secretariats
directly responsible to the Presidency of the Republic. From the point of view
of controlling administration, there is also the Institutional Security Cabinet,
which is responsible for analysing and monitoring questions regarding potential
risks for institutional stability, coordinating federal intelligence activities
in addition to supporting functions to the President. In Brazil, there is also a
system of Councils, which are responsible for proposing guidelines, taking
decisions related to the policies as well as supervising the administration for
the implementation of various programmes. These Councils may comprise of
workers’ representatives, members of civil society, employees organisations,
government representatives and municipal government.

In Brazil, there is also an effective system of Regulatory agencies, which

monitor the delivery of public services. In addition to controlling the quality
of service delivery, they also lay rules and regulations. Currently, following
regulatory agencies, such as:
● National Telecommunications Agency
● National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels
● Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency
● Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency
● National Water Agency
● National Land Transport Agency
● National Civil Aviation Agency

Other than this set up, Brazil has a web of accountability institutions, which
are actively working to control the government administrative agencies. These
institutions work independently, but in close cooperation and coordination in
order to control corruption, malfunctioning and ensuring transparency and
accountability. Besides the Federal Court of Audit, these institutions include:
104
● The Federal Public Prosecution Office Control Mechanism
over Administration
● The office of Comptroller General
● The Federal Police
● The Federal Court of Accounts
● The Federal justice

The judicial control over Brazilian administration is also an effective mechanism.

The STF, Federal Supreme Court, the STJ, Superior Court of Justice, the
regional courts and the network of tribunals keep the administration under
check in various ways. It ensures the working of administrative authorities as
per the spirit of Constitution, federal and other laws, and rules and regulations.
The judicial system of Brazil ensures justice to private individuals with equality
and freedom viz a viz the administrative officials.

Check Your Progress 1

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answers.

ii) Check your answers with those given at the end of the Unit.

1) Why there is need to Control the administration?

2) Name any three agencies controlling the administration in Brazil.

6.5 CONTROL MECHANISM OVER

ADMINISTRATION IN RUSSIA
To understand the mechanism of control over administration in Russia, it
will be interesting to discuss about the type of its administrative set up. The
territory of Russian Federation is divided into regional administrative units of
different political and judicial status. There are basically 47 provinces (oblasts),
4 autonomous okrugs (autonomnyye okugi), 9 krays (kraya) 2 federal cities
(goroda) and 1 autonomous oblast (avtonomnaya oblast) under administrative
divisions in Russia (Russia Administrative divisions – Government, https://
www.indexmundi.com/russia/administrative_divisions.html).

105
Bureaucracy Russia always was regarded as a bureaucratic state, thus, bureaucracy was quite
and Control powerful since long and even the Tsars, despite having enormous powers had to
Mechanism over
take into account the bureaucratic view point and at times fully depended upon
Administration
bureaucrats. The French traveller, Marquis de Custine, has written, "Russia is
ruled by a class of higher civil servants". He also writes that the bureaucratic
system was so powerful that even the powerful Emperor himself was fettered
by the bureaucrats.

Corruption can be seen in Russia also. According to the Corruption Perceptions

Index, Russia was ranked at 129th position (Transparency International, 2020).
Levin and Satarov in their paper on "Corruption and Institutions in Russia" (2000)
have shown that corruption is sustained by ill-defined boundaries between the
government and private business activity. The prominence of corruption is the
primary cause of Russian transition and it has adversely affected the politics,
economy, public administration and even social life.

The executive control over administration is obviously poor. Since the whole
set up needs improvement, it requires a strong and determined effort by the
Russian political executive. However, various studies have shown a culture
of favouritism, nepotism and corrupt practices in taxation. The then President
Boris Yeltsin issued order against Corruption. Since then a number of efforts/
initiatives were made to control the officials and to combat the corruption
but the results have not been encouraging. National Anti-Corruption Plan in
2000, establishment of Anti-corruption Council in 2008, and the National Anti-
Corruption Strategy in 2010 are some of the efforts. To add to this, the President
Vladimir Putin initiated a new national anti-corruption plan for the year 2014-
15. Besides, these fresh initiatives, there is an existing mechanism to control the
corrupt officials, which is in the shape of rules prohibiting the administrators in
business activities and requiring the officials to declare their income, properties,
bank deposits including those of their family members.

The legislative control through State Duma is merely theoretical and formal.
It is limited to passing of skeleton laws and passing of budget. However, the
legislature is not strong enough to control or review the implementation part. The
State Duma appoints the Chairman and six auditors to the Accounting Chamber
of Russia. This chamber carries out annual and current planning and controls
the budgetary and audit system. It also helps towards recovery of outstanding
amounts, dues and deposits to state treasury. During the period 1997 to 2004,
the Accounts Chamber recovered about 67 billion Rubles for the treasury. It
also works to bring about transparency and accountability in the administration.

The weakness of judiciary is one of the main problems in Russia. The system of
party control taught citizens to seek protection in party committees and not in
courts. The weakness of Russian judicial system manifests itself in the failure
of fiscal and executive branches of power to provide for salaries of Judges and
operation of courts. Moreover, court decisions are generally not implemented.
Therefore, the judicial control over administration is very weak and ineffective.

106
6.6 CONTROL MECHANISM OVER Control Mechanism
over Administration
ADMINISTRATION IN INDIA
The Indian system of government and administration is largely a legacy
of the British Colonial rule. The existing system of administration reflects
a mixture of British pattern, Indian traditions and values and also carries
some modern techniques and methods. It is a blend of centralisation and
decentralisation, traditional and progressive administration, administrative
autonomy as well as accountability. In the democratic atmosphere, Indian
administration is accountable in various ways. The whole administrative set
up is subject to control by political executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
During the seven decades of independence, there has been a big expansion of
administrative agencies, which also enjoy numerous powers and discretions in
their functioning. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index, India was
ranked at 86th position (Transparency International, 2020). However, there is
also an elaborate arrangement to control the misuse or abuse of the authority by
the administrative authorities. This arrangement may be classified as executive
(internal) control, legislative control, judicial control and ombudsman type
control.

The executive control over administration is exercised within the administration

in its routine functioning and there is broader control by the political executive,
i.e. through Cabinet and the ministries. Each department works under the
supervision of a Minister and the whole administrative set up is accountable
to the Minister towards the smooth implementation of policies and directives.
There is also a day-to-day supervision and control by the administrative head
of the department, i.e. the Secretary. The administrative hierarchy too provides
an inbuilt mechanism of control. The personnel administration serves as a
control mechanism by the way of postings, training, transfers, promotion
and performance appraisals. At the highest level, the Union Public Service
Commission (UPSC) helps in exercising control over personnel. There is
a set of rules including the Conduct Rules, which are to be followed by the
government servants. The system of Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) is
also there, which help the Senior Officers to control the subordinates.

Of late, a number of modern techniques have been adopted in India, including

the a Result Framework Document (RFD), which provides an organised
approach to ensure effectiveness and control. An RFD is essentially a record
of understanding between a Minister representing the people’s mandate, the
Secretary of the Department for implementing this mandate. This document
contains not only the agreed objectives, policies, programmes and projects but
also success indicators and targets to measure progress in implementing those.

The legislative control over administration in India may be divided broadly

into three categories - general control over policies and activities; financial
control; and control through the parliamentary committees. The general control
of legislature over the administration (executive) is exercised on the floor of the
house, and is initiated by the members of Parliament in the form of:
107
Bureaucracy ● Parliamentary questions;
and Control
Mechanism over ● Call attention motion;
Administration
● Adjournment motion;

● Half-an-hour discussion;

● Motions for discussions on matters of urgent public importance;

● No confidence motion; and

● Other debates and discussions in the routine working of Parliament, and

during the legislative process.

Parliament gets innumerable opportunities to examine and review the public

administration through the institution of parliamentary debates and questions,
but it does not get a chance of close and continuous examination of the detailed
functioning of the executive government. However, administration comes under
close scrutiny of the Parliament when the budget is under discussion. This is
really a critical time for the government. During the general discussion and
voting on demands for grants, the members of the Parliament get opportunity
to discuss and criticise the working of each Ministry, Department or other
agencies of the government. There is no matter, which cannot be raised during
the debate. Issues like questions of policy, economy, grievances, complaints,
adequacy or inadequacy of projects, schemes and outlays can always be raised
and the Minister has to give satisfactory reply to be let off. Audit reports are
also discussed in the house, other than the Parliamentary Committees.

In India, there is a comprehensive arrangement to exercise control over

administration. One such legislative instrument is the Parliamentary Committees.
In fact, to make the legislative control over administration more effective and
minute, there is a system of Parliamentary Committees, which facilitates a
detailed examination of administration work, its implementation and finances.

Some of the prominent committees are:

● Public Accounts Committee

● Estimates Committee

● Committee on Government Assurances

● Committee on Petitions

● Committee on Public undertakings

● Committee on Subordinate Legislation

Indian Judiciary also plays an important role towards the review of administrative
actions. Citizens in India have been provided with legal means to challenge the
atrocities of administration. The judiciary, in fact, has assumed the role of a
108 guardian of citizen’s fundamental rights.
The position of judicial review of administrative actions in India is different Control Mechanism
from that in the United Kingdom (UK) and in the United States of America over Administration
(USA). In UK, the supreme law, which the court enforces is, in the last analysis,
the law of the Parliament, whereas in India the supreme law is the Constitution.
The courts in England cannot strike down any law passed by the Parliament;
and the judicial review of administrative adjudication is limited to the questions
of statutory and common law constructions. In USA, judicial supremacy is
securely established by the V and XIV amendments of the US Constitution,
which ensures immunity to every person of his life and property. The US
Supreme Court has been empowered to decide not only what the 'law actually
is but also what it should be in a given circumstances. In India, we have tried
to strike a balance between these two different ideas. Here, the administrative
adjudication is required to conform to the statutes as well as the Constitution.
The Indian Supreme Court has only the power to interpret as to what actually is
the law but it cannot direct what it should be.

In India, the judicial control over administration is based upon the grounds listed
earlier in this unit, such as lack of jurisdiction, error of procedure, error of law,
violation of rules of natural justice and so on. In India, the system of judicial
control and review of administrative action has been inherited from Britain.
It is on this foundation that the Indian courts have built the superstructure of
control mechanism. The whole law of judicial review of administrative actions
has been developed by judges on case-to-case basis.

To get relief through the judiciary, there are various remedies available with the
citizens, which are broadly divided into ordinary remedies and extra-ordinary
remedies. The ordinary remedies refer to the power of ordinary courts of the
land to exercise control over administrative actions. This includes : injunctions
(ordinary judicial process); declaratory action (declaring the rights and
obligations of public authorities; and Suit for Damages (filing of suits by persons
against the administration for wrongful action of officials). The extraordinary
remedies are available with the citizens are in the form of writs.

A “Writ” is a formal order by the judiciary in the name of government/

officials/ courts or other competent authorities. Article 32 and Article 226 of the
Constitution provides that the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts are
empowered to issue “Writs” in their respective jurisdictions of the nature of:
i) Habeas Corpus — issued against illegal detention
ii) Mandamus — a command to perform/act
iii) Certiorari — issued to subordinate court to transfer the records/case
iv) Prohibition — issued to prevent action in violation of jurisdiction
v) Quo-Warranto — issued to question the legality of office.

Check Your Progress 2

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answers.

ii) Check your answers with those given at the end of the Unit.
109
Bureaucracy 1) Discuss the problems of administration in Russia.
and Control
Mechanism over
Administration

2) Name any four Committees of Indian Parliament.

6.7 CONTROL MECHANISM OVER

ADMINISTRATION IN CHINA
Authoritarian rule is the hallmark of China and since 1949 the Chinese
Communist Party has ruled the country on the regressive principle of “zero
tolerance” for any opposition to the government. Any dissent within the party,
administration or otherwise is often dealt with brutally. Highest decision-
making body in China is the standing committee of the Politburo, heading a
Pyramid of Power. Politburo members enjoy full powers. Formally their power
stems from their positions in the Politburo. But in China, personal relations
count much more than job titles.

In China, there is one set of administration constituted of huge party bureaucracy,

and another is government bureaucracy. The party bureaucracy is led by party
elites and they get special training in the Central Party School. There are roughly
300 million government employees in China, whereas the government elite
are numbered less than 3000 only, which include the high level officials. The
whole body of officials is disciplined and committed lot, and avoids mistakes
to avoid the wrath of their bosses. There is no openness or any set system of
accountability. John Lee writes in Newsweek: “While modern China is the most
over governed land in Asia. It is also one of the worst governed. Even as China
has decentralised and officials have multiplied, the country is not building the
institutions needed for better transparency and accountability. CCP's influence
over courts, bureaucracies, media, research institutions and state controlled
enterprises well known. It is difficult to make CCP's local officials accountable
especially when Beijing relies on them to maintain the Party’s hold on power in
far flung places”(Lee, 2010).

Execution of government programmes is very slow in most of the departments.

At the widespread local levels, there is poor working of administration. Delays
and passive implementation is common. The common ills of bribes, red-tapism,
and favouritism are quite frequent. According to the Corruption Perceptions
Index, China was ranked at 78th position (Transparency International, 2020).
110
The control over Chinese administration through budgeting and audit has proved Control Mechanism
beneficial upto a large extent. As reported in China Journal of Accounting over Administration
Research (June, 2012), the budgeting and audit system in China has worked
well towards the better governance. The National Audit Office of China is
the supreme audit institution of China and works under the direct guidance of
the Chinese Premier. It enjoys vast ranging powers and can also ask for any
information, documents and financial plans from the administrative officials.
It can even curb some ongoing acts of administration, which covers the areas
of implementation of central budget, revenue and expenditure of various
departments and public undertakings, and Central Bank of China.

The legislative control over Chinese administration is exercised by the National

People’s Congress. It also has the power to appoint few officials. These are also
a few consultative committees, which provide an opportunity to discuss various
administrative matters with the high officials of select departments. However,
in China, rather than the legislature, it is the party which can penetrate deep into
the administration to control the officials.

The judicial control over administration has always been a weak area in China.
No prominent matter concerning administrative litigation can be found in
China. This is because of the assumption that in socialist states, administrative
agencies could not be guilty of abuses against individuals because the interests
of individuals and the government were identical and there was no room
for conflict between them (Ludwikowski, 1988). During the last part of the
previous century, a number of reforms were introduced and a few legislative
measures were also undertaken in order to bring about administration under the
judicial preview. One of the prominent laws in this regard is the Administrative
Procedure Law. Under this law, a few remedies have been provided to the
citizens against the wrongful acts of administration. However, despite a number
of significant provisions in the law, the overall implementation is partial. Over
the years the number of cases handled by the judiciary and the judicial decisions
are not very encouraging.

6.8 CONTROL MECHANISM OVER

ADMINISTRATION IN SOUTH AFRICA
South African administration is working as per the Constitution adopted in mid
1990s, which is based on democratic ideals. There is a system of separation
of powers and the administration is subject to control by the executive,
legislature and judiciary. As mentioned in the previous unit, the South African
administration is suffering from a number of problems. With the change in
regime in 1990s the country inherited a socially dominated bureaucracy, which
includes over 95 per cent top officials who were white and less than one per
cent officials were blacks. The African National Congress (the ruling party)
faced the top administrative set up, which they felt could not be trusted. Under
the voluntary retirement scheme a large number of experienced personnel left
the job leading to a poor state of affairs with deficient posts, less experienced
officials, poor administrative practices, misuse of resources, and powers and
111
Bureaucracy general administrative corruption. According to the Corruption Perceptions
and Control Index, South Africa was ranked at 69th position (Transparency International,
Mechanism over
2020).
Administration

The executive control over administration is vested in the political executive

headed by the President of South Africa. The political executive is constituted
of the President, Deputy President and the Ministers. There is a system
of hierarchical administration, a system of administrative law, personnel
administration and financial administration, which help the executive towards
the day to day internal control over administrative authorities. However, as some
studies indicate, political office bearers attempt to politicise the bureaucracy
under the guise of greater responsiveness and accountability. The Public Service
Act of 1994, clearly indicates the duties and responsibilities of administrative
officials, which are to be followed by them during the implementation process.

The legislative control over administration is of very general nature. It is

through debates and discussions in the House and passage of laws affecting
supervision over the working of administration. The legislature (Parliament) also
exercises control over administration by approving the budget and reviewing
its implementation. The extended arm of legislature is audit machinery. The
supreme audit institution of South Africa is Auditor General of South Africa
(AGSA). It works with substantial autonomy to exercise control over the
administrative actions and tries to assure efficiency, effectiveness, impartiality,
economy and compliance to the principles of good governance.

The judicial control over administration, prior to the Constitution of 1996 was
on common law grounds determined by the Supreme Court of Appeal. The
Section 33 of the Constitution entitles everyone the right to administrative
action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. Some of the common
grounds for judicial review in South Africa are:
● Lack of jurisdiction / error of jurisdiction

● Non-compliance with procedures

● Unfair procedure

● Unauthorised action or on the basis of irrelevant conditions

● Error of Law or Contradiction of law or violation of spirit of law

● Unreasonable, unfair, malafide, failure to act or violation of spirit of the

Constitution.

There is a provision of remedies available against the administrative authorities,

if any of the above grounds is visible or proved.

Check Your Progress 3

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answers.

ii) Check your answers with those given at the end of the Unit.
112
1) Explain the basic features of control over administration in China. Control Mechanism
over Administration

2) Enumerate the problems of administration in South Africa.

6.9 CONCLUSION
Controlling administration or accountability though sounds simple but
practically is a very complex task. As we have noted in this unit, it is important
to give powers to administrative authorities for the smooth conduct of their
functions, but at the same time it is quite important to keep these powers under
check so as to avoid their misuse. In most of the countries there are arrangements
of executive control, legislative control, financial control and judicial control
over administration. In the BRICS countries, the control mechanism through
these instruments varies from country to country. As you must have noted that
among the BRICS countries the arrangement (mechanism) of control over
administration is rather specific and elaborate in India whereas in the socialist/
communist countries of Russia and China there are not much emphasis on
control over administration. However, the control over administration through
budgeting and auditing can be found in all these countries, and also some efforts
for reforms for better governance may be noted in all these countries.

6.10 GLOSSARY
Red-Tapism: Unnecessary delays; sleeping over the files.

Rules of Natural Justice: Procedural principles with absence of bias and giving
the chance of hearing the other party.

Rule of Law: Against the rule by men-supremacy of law and equality before
law.

Ombudsman: Extra legislative authority to safeguard the public interests.

6.11 REFERENCES
BBC. (2012). How China is Ruled: Discipline Commission. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-13904439
113
Bureaucracy Bhattacharya, M. (2006). New Horizons of Public Administration. New Delhi,
and Control India: Jawahar Publishers.
Mechanism over
Administration
Kiselev, I. N., & Mironenko, S. V. (1991). Russian bureaucratic ruling elite:
Towards a social portrait of Russia’s higher bureaucracy during the first quarter
of the 19th century. Historical Social Research. 16(2), 144-154.

Lee, J. (2010). China’s Bad Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.newsweek.

com/chinas-bad-statistics-74289

Manchester, A.K. (1972). The Growth of Bureaucracy in Brazil. Journal of

Latin American Studies. 4(1), 77-83.

Mavanyisi, H.J. (2002). The Nature of Political control over the Bureaucracy.
Retrieved from http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/696/dissertation_
mavanyisi_hj.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y

Norton, J.M. (2013). How Chinese bureaucracy decides. Retrieved from https://
thediplomat.com/tag/chinese-ministry-of-foreign-affairs/

Russia Administrative divisions – Government. Retrieved from https://www.

indexmundi.com/russia/administrative_divisions.html

Singh, S. & Singh, S. (2015). Indian Administration. Jalandhar, India: New

Academic.

Transparency International. (2020). Corruption Perceptions Index. Retrieved

from https://www.transparency.org/en/

6.12 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

EXERCISES
Check Your Progress 1

1) Your answer should include the following points:

● Your answer should focus on problems of administration such as

misuse of powers, inefficiency, lack of transparency, red-tapism and
lack of accountability. For more details, refer Section 6.4

2) Your answer should include the following points:

● Besides executive and legislative control, there are number of

regulatory agencies such as National Electrical Agency, National
Health Surveillance Agency, and National Water Agency.

Check Your Progress 2

1) Your answer should include the following points:

● Your answer should include the bureaucratic culture, dominance of

114
bureaucracy and corruption in Russian administration.
2) Your answer should include the following points: Control Mechanism
over Administration
● Parliamentary Committees in India — Public Accounts Committee,
Estimates Committee, Committee on Government Assurances and
Committee on Petitions.

Check Your Progress 3

1) Your answer should include the following points:

● Your answer should focus on the existence of Chinese Community

Party Bureaucracy along with the government bureaucracy,
weak executive, legislative and nature of judicial control over
administration.

2) Your answer should include the following points:

● Your answer should focus on the problems of SA’s administration

such as corruption, favouritism, inefficiency, malfunctioning of key
administrative agencies, misuse of facilities, etc.

115