Distinction between politics and administration as “the expression of the will of the state and the execution of that will.”

Sample Solution

Full Answer Section

Goodnow believed that politics should be kept separate from administration. He argued that if politics were to interfere with administration, it would lead to inefficiency and corruption. He also argued that if administration were to interfere with politics, it would lead to tyranny.

Goodnow's distinction between politics and administration has been influential in the field of public administration. However, it has also been criticized. Some critics argue that it is not always possible to separate politics and administration. They argue that all administrative decisions have political implications.

Other critics argue that Goodnow's distinction is too simplistic. They argue that there are many different aspects of administration, and that some aspects are more political than others.

What did Goodnow mean by “the expression of the will of the state and the execution of that will”?

Goodnow meant that politics is the process of deciding what the government should do, while administration is the process of carrying out those decisions. He argued that politics is about setting goals, while administration is about achieving those goals.

For example, the government may decide that it wants to reduce crime. This is a political decision. The administration would then be responsible for developing and implementing policies to reduce crime.

Which aspect of criminal justice administrations should be under political control and what aspects should be free from politics, in your opinion? Explain and give examples

In my opinion, the following aspects of criminal justice administrations should be under political control:

• The setting of criminal justice policy
• The appointment of senior officials in the criminal justice system
• The allocation of resources to the criminal justice system

These are all decisions that have a significant impact on the criminal justice system. It is important that these decisions are made by elected officials who are accountable to the public.

The following aspects of criminal justice administrations should be free from politics:

• The day-to-day operations of the criminal justice system
• The investigation and prosecution of crimes
• The adjudication of criminal cases

These are all activities that require expertise and impartiality. It is important that these activities are not influenced by political considerations.

For example, the police should be free to investigate crimes without interference from politicians. The prosecutors should be free to prosecute cases without fear of reprisals from politicians. And the judges should be free to adjudicate cases impartially, without fear of being influenced by political pressure.

Of course, there is no clear line between the aspects of criminal justice administration that should be under political control and the aspects that should be free from politics. Ultimately, it is up to each jurisdiction to decide where to draw the line.

Here are some specific examples of how politics can affect criminal justice administration:

• Politicians may pressure the police to focus on certain types of crime, such as drug crime, at the expense of other types of crime, such as property crime.
• Politicians may appoint unqualified officials to senior positions in the criminal justice system.
• Politicians may withhold resources from the criminal justice system, making it difficult to carry out its mission.

These are just a few examples of how politics can affect criminal justice administration. It is important to be aware of these potential conflicts of interest so that we can ensure that the criminal justice system is fair and impartial.