JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRIATIVE DECISIONS – A BACKGROUND PAPER

Judicial review is now the normal route for anyone seeking to challenge an administrative decision, unless there is a separate statutory right of appeal as for example in town planning matters. Grounds for challenge have been variously described by the courts but include (a) that the decision was wrong in law, (b) that it was unreasonable or irrational and (c) that there was procedural unfairness. Those who seek review must understand that the court will not substitute its own view for that of the decision taker. The adequacy of the remedy of judicial review has been challenged by some on the grounds that leave to proceed has to be sought from the court within three months. There is too the difficulty in some cases of establishing that the plaintiff has a sufficient interest to sue. Whilst it is too early to talk of a distinct body of public as opposed to private law, recent decisions have widened the concept of public law and have interpreted the circumstances in which a private right may be pursued against a public authority.     

The U. N. Disposal of Eritrea

This forms the greater part of a lecture given on the 29th January,with Major-General Sir Richard Lewis in the Chair. In introducingthe speaker General Lewis said that Sir Duncan Cumming had beenone of the first to enter Eritrea when it was captured duringthe war and had been the last to leave in 1952. During, andafter, the war, Sir Duncan had been responsible for the civiladministration of all of the occupied Italian Colonies in theMiddle East, of which Eritrea was one. In 1949, he returnedto his own service in the Sudan and in February, 1951, whenhis predecessor retired from Eritrea owing to ill health, heconsented to undertake the difficult task of implementing theUnited Nations resolution on Eritrea. In eighteen months hehad to hold democratic general elections, in an area where suchthings were not well understood, to create a Government in accordancewith the provisions of the constitution and the resolution,to create a civil service, which entailed as a starting pointthe elementary education of selected literates, and to leavethe country with a balanced budget. Sir Duncan had not had aclean start at the job because at the time of his arrival inEritrea it was not possible to move about freely. The localbrigands had made unescorted movement unsafe: incidents occurreddaily and murders and atrocities were frequent. By the latesummer of 1951 he had made brigandage unprofitable and was ableto turn to his constructive task. In doing so, he won the confidenceand respect and, indeed, the affection, not of merely some ofthe conflicting interests but of them all.     

WOMEN IN UK PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SCHOLARSHIP?

The promotion of gender equality has been adopted onto many national policy agendas with the introduction of legislation, public policies and regulatory duties. Yet, gender occupational segregation and discrimination persists. This paper examines the gendered nature of the UK public sector and questions the extent to which public administration scholarship addresses gender bias. The evidence, based on secondary and primary data, reveals that public administration scholarship tends to value masculinity. The intention of the paper is to stimulate a debate by providing a critical reflection of public administration scholarship, and concludes with some tentative suggestions on ways forward for the field of study.     

Liberal Democrat Leadership: The Cases of Ashdown and Kennedy

Effective leadership of the Liberal Democrats requires a combination of strengths: communications skills, a clear agenda, the ability to manage the party and personal abilities, including stamina, self-confidence and a love for the party itself. This article assesses Paddy Ashdown's and Charles Kennedy's periods as leader. It concludes that the first two phases of Ashdown's leadership were successful: he first ensured the party's survival and then positioned it so that it was able to benefit from the rise in support for the centre-left without being squeezed out by Labour. In the third phase, however, the attempt to deliver a common agenda with Labour was a failure, and Ashdown increasingly lost touch with his own party. Kennedy's first two years as leader were also relatively successful, but after that his leadership fell apart, suffering from a lack of an agenda, a failure of party management, a weakness in communication skills and a lack of self-confidence. His underlying problem was not alcoholism; it was that he was not capable of being an effective leader.