收集关于使用议会监督工具的证据:一个南非案例研究

Q2 Social Sciences
Wilhelm Janse van Rensburg, F. Vreÿ, T. Neethling
{"title":"收集关于使用议会监督工具的证据:一个南非案例研究","authors":"Wilhelm Janse van Rensburg, F. Vreÿ, T. Neethling","doi":"10.4102/aej.v8i1.424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Parliament, through its oversight function, plays a central role in holding the executive to account. In South Africa’s 2014 Defence Review policy document, it was stated that the ‘Defence Force is in a critical state of decline’. This brings about the question whether the South African Parliament effectively held the executive to account regarding developments around defence.Objectives: The article aims to gather evidence on the use of oversight tools by the South African Parliament over a 20-year period, within the post-1994 democratic dispensation, in order to determine the broader trajectory of parliamentary defence oversight.Method: To determine the trajectory of oversight, this article gathered evidence on the use of internationally recognised parliamentary oversight tools by South Africa’s two parliamentary defence committees from 1994 to 2014. The period allows for a 20-year review of oversight of defence, inclusive of four full parliamentary terms. Evidence was collected on parliamentary debates, questions, special inquiries, oversight visits and the use of external audits as oversight tools.Results: The article found that tools were used with varying degrees of success. Results for research on each oversight tool is discussed.Conclusion: Based on evidence on the use of oversight tools, this article concludes that over a 20-year period there was a declining trajectory in parliamentary oversight of the defence portfolio. The proven applicability of the criteria utilised in this article can serve to inform evaluations of the effectiveness of parliamentary oversight, specifically at committee level.","PeriodicalId":37531,"journal":{"name":"African Evaluation Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Collecting evidence on the use of parliamentary oversight tools: A South African case study\",\"authors\":\"Wilhelm Janse van Rensburg, F. Vreÿ, T. Neethling\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/aej.v8i1.424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Parliament, through its oversight function, plays a central role in holding the executive to account. In South Africa’s 2014 Defence Review policy document, it was stated that the ‘Defence Force is in a critical state of decline’. This brings about the question whether the South African Parliament effectively held the executive to account regarding developments around defence.Objectives: The article aims to gather evidence on the use of oversight tools by the South African Parliament over a 20-year period, within the post-1994 democratic dispensation, in order to determine the broader trajectory of parliamentary defence oversight.Method: To determine the trajectory of oversight, this article gathered evidence on the use of internationally recognised parliamentary oversight tools by South Africa’s two parliamentary defence committees from 1994 to 2014. The period allows for a 20-year review of oversight of defence, inclusive of four full parliamentary terms. Evidence was collected on parliamentary debates, questions, special inquiries, oversight visits and the use of external audits as oversight tools.Results: The article found that tools were used with varying degrees of success. Results for research on each oversight tool is discussed.Conclusion: Based on evidence on the use of oversight tools, this article concludes that over a 20-year period there was a declining trajectory in parliamentary oversight of the defence portfolio. The proven applicability of the criteria utilised in this article can serve to inform evaluations of the effectiveness of parliamentary oversight, specifically at committee level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37531,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Evaluation Journal\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Evaluation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v8i1.424\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Evaluation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v8i1.424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:议会通过其监督职能,在追究行政责任方面发挥着核心作用。在南非2014年的国防审查政策文件中,声明“国防力量处于衰退的危急状态”。这就产生了一个问题,即南非议会是否有效地要求行政部门对国防方面的事态发展负责。目的:本文旨在收集1994年后民主制度下南非议会在20年期间使用监督工具的证据,以确定议会国防监督的更广泛轨迹。方法:为了确定监督的轨迹,本文收集了1994年至2014年南非两个议会国防委员会使用国际公认的议会监督工具的证据。这段时间允许对国防监督进行为期20年的审查,包括四个完整的议会任期。收集了关于议会辩论、提问、特别调查、监督访问和利用外部审计作为监督工具的证据。结果:文章发现工具的使用取得了不同程度的成功。讨论了每种监督工具的研究结果。结论:基于使用监督工具的证据,本文得出结论,在20年的时间里,议会对国防投资组合的监督呈下降趋势。本条所采用的标准经证实具有适用性,可用于评估议会监督的有效性,特别是在委员会一级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Collecting evidence on the use of parliamentary oversight tools: A South African case study
Background: Parliament, through its oversight function, plays a central role in holding the executive to account. In South Africa’s 2014 Defence Review policy document, it was stated that the ‘Defence Force is in a critical state of decline’. This brings about the question whether the South African Parliament effectively held the executive to account regarding developments around defence.Objectives: The article aims to gather evidence on the use of oversight tools by the South African Parliament over a 20-year period, within the post-1994 democratic dispensation, in order to determine the broader trajectory of parliamentary defence oversight.Method: To determine the trajectory of oversight, this article gathered evidence on the use of internationally recognised parliamentary oversight tools by South Africa’s two parliamentary defence committees from 1994 to 2014. The period allows for a 20-year review of oversight of defence, inclusive of four full parliamentary terms. Evidence was collected on parliamentary debates, questions, special inquiries, oversight visits and the use of external audits as oversight tools.Results: The article found that tools were used with varying degrees of success. Results for research on each oversight tool is discussed.Conclusion: Based on evidence on the use of oversight tools, this article concludes that over a 20-year period there was a declining trajectory in parliamentary oversight of the defence portfolio. The proven applicability of the criteria utilised in this article can serve to inform evaluations of the effectiveness of parliamentary oversight, specifically at committee level.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
African Evaluation Journal
African Evaluation Journal Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles merit on any subject related to evaluation, and provide targeted information of professional interest to members of AfrEA and its national associations. Aims of the African Evaluation Journal (AEJ): -AEJ aims to be a high-quality, peer-reviewed journal that builds evaluation-related knowledge and practice in support of effective developmental policies on the African continent. -AEJ aims to provide a communication platform for scholars and practitioners of evaluation to share and debate ideas about evaluation theory and practice in Africa. -AEJ aims to promote cross-fertilisation of ideas and methodologies between countries and between evaluation scholars and practitioners in the developed and developing world. -AEJ aims to promote evaluation scholarship and authorship, and a culture of peer-review in the African evaluation community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信