, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE ONLY
Introduction to the Portfolio
This portfolio addresses two interconnected pillars of modern public administration: administrative
justice and delegated legislation. The foundational premise, drawn from Question 1, is that justice is
not an abstract legal ideal but a matter of individual moral responsibility. Given the unavoidable
presence of human fallibility and self-interest in every public official, administrative justice must be
closely related to the actual sphere of public administration. Administrative justice ensures that
public bodies and those exercising public functions make right, fair, and just decisions, particularly
when citizens experience government action as wrong, unfair, or unjust (Mashaw, 2006). From this
premise flows the need to examine the qualities of a just public official, especially as public officials
become increasingly involved with delegated legislation.
Question 2 builds directly upon this foundation. Delegated legislation—empowered legislation that
allows government to modify law without waiting for new parliamentary bills—is a practical
necessity for making technical changes, such as adjusting sanctions or updating fees under an
existing statute (Craig, 2016). However, because delegated legislation is often made by officials
rather than directly by elected parliaments, it magnifies the risks associated with human fallibility
and self-interest. Therefore, understanding the types, necessity, disadvantages, and controls over
delegated legislation is essential for any public official seeking to act justly.
Together, the two essays in this portfolio argue that administrative justice cannot be achieved
without responsible management of delegated powers, and that delegated legislation cannot be
legitimate without the internalisation of administrative justice principles by individual officials. The
portfolio uses public sector examples throughout to illustrate how these concepts operate in practice,
from municipal by-laws and health regulations to procurement decisions and emergency orders.
Introduction to the Portfolio
This portfolio addresses two interconnected pillars of modern public administration: administrative
justice and delegated legislation. The foundational premise, drawn from Question 1, is that justice is
not an abstract legal ideal but a matter of individual moral responsibility. Given the unavoidable
presence of human fallibility and self-interest in every public official, administrative justice must be
closely related to the actual sphere of public administration. Administrative justice ensures that
public bodies and those exercising public functions make right, fair, and just decisions, particularly
when citizens experience government action as wrong, unfair, or unjust (Mashaw, 2006). From this
premise flows the need to examine the qualities of a just public official, especially as public officials
become increasingly involved with delegated legislation.
Question 2 builds directly upon this foundation. Delegated legislation—empowered legislation that
allows government to modify law without waiting for new parliamentary bills—is a practical
necessity for making technical changes, such as adjusting sanctions or updating fees under an
existing statute (Craig, 2016). However, because delegated legislation is often made by officials
rather than directly by elected parliaments, it magnifies the risks associated with human fallibility
and self-interest. Therefore, understanding the types, necessity, disadvantages, and controls over
delegated legislation is essential for any public official seeking to act justly.
Together, the two essays in this portfolio argue that administrative justice cannot be achieved
without responsible management of delegated powers, and that delegated legislation cannot be
legitimate without the internalisation of administrative justice principles by individual officials. The
portfolio uses public sector examples throughout to illustrate how these concepts operate in practice,
from municipal by-laws and health regulations to procurement decisions and emergency orders.
