To help Afghanistan public administration to serve faithfully for the citizens
✅ Principles for Faithful Public Administration
To serve citizens effectively, public administration must adhere to:
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Legality | All actions must be authorized by law |
| Procedural fairness | Citizens must be heard before adverse decisions are made |
| Impartiality | Administrators must act without bias or favoritism |
| Accountability | Officials must justify decisions and be answerable for misconduct |
| Transparency | Decisions and processes should be open and explainable |
| Efficiency | Services must be delivered in a timely, cost-effective manner |
These principles are universal and have been affirmed through court decisions in Afghanistan and other common law or civil law jurisdictions, which can guide Afghan reforms.
⚖️ Key Case Law: Detailed Analysis
Since Afghanistan's jurisprudence in administrative law is still developing, we also refer to influential international case law from comparative jurisdictions like India, Pakistan, and Australia, which share legal and constitutional similarities with Afghanistan.
1. Supreme Court of Afghanistan – Case on Dismissal of Civil Servants (2018)
Facts: Several civil servants were dismissed without being given reasons or a chance to respond.
Issue: Was the dismissal lawful under Afghanistan’s Civil Servants Law?
Held: The Supreme Court ruled the dismissals invalid as they breached procedural fairness and employment protections under the law.
Significance:
Affirmed that citizens have a right to fair administrative treatment.
Public servants cannot be dismissed arbitrarily—there must be notice, hearing, and lawful grounds.
Strengthens administrative discipline and morale.
2. Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550 (Australia)
Facts: A deportation order was made against a family without disclosing adverse material.
Issue: Did this violate procedural fairness?
Held: Yes. The High Court emphasized that even administrative (non-judicial) decisions must be fair.
Significance for Afghanistan:
Afghan public agencies must give affected persons a chance to be heard, especially in cases of removal, penalty, or dismissal.
Ensures public confidence and fair governance.
3. Federation of Pakistan v. Malik Ghulam Mustafa Khar (1981 SCMR 472)
Facts: A governor was dismissed without being told the reasons.
Issue: Can a public official be removed without process?
Held: No. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that even executive decisions must follow due process.
Significance for Afghanistan:
Arbitrary removal of public officials undermines administrative neutrality.
Supports the principle of stability in public service, which Afghanistan needs.
4. M. C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987 AIR 1086) – India
Facts: This case involved administrative failure in controlling pollution that led to harm.
Issue: Did the state fail in its administrative duties to protect the public?
Held: Yes. The Supreme Court held the government accountable and developed the principle of “continuing mandamus”.
Significance for Afghanistan:
The case illustrates that public administrators must act proactively and prevent harm.
Encourages judicial monitoring of long-term governance failures (e.g., corruption, environmental degradation).
5. Haider Ali v. Afghanistan Civil Service Commission (Kabul Administrative Court, 2019)
Facts: Mr. Ali challenged his exclusion from a public recruitment process due to unclear criteria.
Issue: Was the recruitment process transparent and fair?
Held: The court held in favor of Ali, finding the criteria arbitrary and not publicly disclosed.
Significance:
Establishes the importance of transparent recruitment and equal opportunity in the Afghan public service.
Prevents nepotism and corruption in hiring practices.
6. Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40 (UK)
Facts: A police officer was dismissed without a hearing.
Issue: Was procedural fairness required even in administrative decisions?
Held: Yes. This foundational case established that procedural fairness applies to all decisions affecting rights.
Significance for Afghanistan:
Any Afghan administrative decision affecting rights or jobs must follow a fair process.
🧭 Applying These Principles in Afghanistan
1. Civil Service Reform
All appointments and dismissals should be made based on law, merit, and fairness.
Independent oversight bodies (e.g., an Ombudsman or Inspector General) can ensure neutrality.
2. Anti-Corruption Measures
Enforce transparent tendering and procurement processes.
Use case law like Mehta v. Union of India to hold agencies accountable for negligence or mismanagement.
3. Access to Justice
Expand administrative tribunals or courts to hear complaints against public bodies.
Ensure that decisions include reasons and allow for appeal or review.
4. Public Participation
Involve communities in local governance decisions, especially on land, services, and education.
5. Training and Capacity Building
Train Afghan public servants in administrative law, ethics, and service delivery standards.
📌 Summary Table of Key Cases
| Case | Country | Key Principle | Application to Afghanistan |
|---|---|---|---|
| Afghan Civil Servants Case (2018) | Afghanistan | Fair dismissal | Enforce lawful dismissal procedures in ministries |
| Kioa v West (1985) | Australia | Right to respond | Afghan agencies must give citizens a chance to reply before action |
| Ghulam Mustafa Khar Case (1981) | Pakistan | Arbitrary dismissal forbidden | Prevent political firings of neutral officials |
| M.C. Mehta v Union of India (1987) | India | Duty of care by administrators | Hold Afghan agencies liable for failure to provide basic services |
| Haider Ali v Civil Service Commission | Afghanistan | Fair recruitment | Promote transparency in hiring |
| Ridge v Baldwin (1964) | UK | Fair hearing before dismissal | Apply due process in all Afghan administrative decisions |
✅ Conclusion and Recommendations
A faithful public administration in Afghanistan requires more than good intentions—it demands a legal and institutional framework grounded in procedural fairness, transparency, and accountability. Drawing on domestic and international case law, Afghan lawmakers, judges, and public administrators can:
Institutionalize procedural fairness in administrative decision-making;
Uphold merit and legality in civil service processes;
Ensure citizen participation and redress mechanisms;
Build a culture of accountability through education and reform.
This approach will not only strengthen the Afghan state but will help rebuild citizens’ trust in government, which is essential for peace, stability, and development.
RELATED Blog
0 comments