SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi / 2021 / Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 1

Legislative Ethics: Relationship Between Democracy and Legislative Corruption

Yasama Etiği: Demokrasi ve Yasama Yolsuzluğu İlişkisi

Mehmet KOÇDEMİR
Yusuf PUSTU
Pages
1–19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results have showed that there is a relationship between legislative corruption, which is an unethical behavior, and democracy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The public sector carries out its activities with the delegation of authority.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this way, confidence in democratic institutions increases.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results have showed that there is a relationship between legislative corruption, which is an unethical behavior, and democracy.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The public sector carries out its activities with the delegation of authority. Agents should act in accordance with the public interest. These rules also support serving the general public interest. In this way, confidence in democratic institutions increases. In cases where private benefit is preferred instead of general public interest, corruption occurs. This study tries to contribute to the ideas, that it would be important for legislators to have ethical rules, by showing the relationship between legislative corruption and democracy. The results have showed that there is a relationship between legislative corruption, which is an unethical behavior, and democracy.

Özet

Kamu kesimi faaliyetlerini yetki devri ile yürütür. Yetki devralanlar kamu yararına uygun hareket etmelidirler. Etik kurallar, yetki kullanan tüm görevlilerde olduğu gibi yasama üyelerinin de davranışlarına yön verir. Bu yolla, demokratik kurumlara olan güven artar. Genel kamu yararı yerine özel menfaatin gözetildiği durumlarda ise yolsuzluklar ortaya çıkar. Bu çalışma, yasama üyelerinin etik kurallara sahip olmasının gerekli olduğu yönündeki fikirlere, yasama yolsuzluğu ile demokrasi arasındaki ilişkiyi göstermek suretiyle katkı sağlama çabasındadır. Elde edilen sonuçlar, bir etik dışı davranış olan yasama yolsuzluğu ile demokrasi arasında ilişki olduğunu göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOÇDEMİR, M., PUSTU, Y. (2021). Legislative Ethics: Relationship Between Democracy and Legislative Corruption. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi, Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 1, 1–19. https://ajindex.com/articles/320258

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Aarnio A. (2001), “Lawyers Professional Ethics-Do They Exist?”, Ratio Juris, vol.14, No: 1 March 2001, 1 (9) Akçakaya M., Hasanoğlu M. (2009), “21. Yüzyılda Kamu Personeli: Etik Sorunlar ve Yeni Arayışlar”, Kamu Etiği Sempozyumu Bildirileri 1-2,
  2. TODAİE, Ankara, s.569-586
  3. Barro, R. J. (1999). Determinants of Democracy. Journal of Political economy, 107(6) Bauman Z. (1998), Postmodern Etik, çev. Alev Türker, Ayrıntı Yayınları,
  4. İstanbul Benson G.C. (1978),
  5. Political Corruption in America, Legislation, Mass:D.C.Health Bicer İ. (2009), “Kamu ve Özek Sektör Kuruluşlarında Etik Değerlerin Uygulanması”, Kamu Etiği Sempozyumu Bildirileri 1-2,
  6. TODAİE, Ankara, s.689-698
  7. Billington R. (1997), Felsefeyi Yaşamak: Ahlak Düşüncesine Giriş, çev.Abdullah Yılmaz, Ayrıntı Yayınları,
  8. İstanbul Bolleyer, N., & Smirnova, V. (2017). Parliamentary Ethics Regulation and Trust İn European Democracies. West European Politics, 40(6), 1218–1240
  9. Brien, A. (1998). Professional Ethics and The Culture of Trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(4), 391-409.
  10. Bruce, W. (1996). “Codes of Ethics and Codes of Conduct: Perceived Contribution to the Practice of Ethics in Local Government.” Public Integrity Annual 17, 23–30
  11. Callahan D. (1981),
  12. U.S. Congress, Senate Select Committee on Ethics, Hearings, Revising the Senate Code of Official Conduct Pursuant to Senate Resolution 109, 97. Cong. 2.Sess., Washington DC Printing Office Center, P. (1998). Parliamentary Accountability and Good Governance: A Parliamentarian’s Handbook. Parliamentary Center, Ottawa Cini M. (2019). Institutional Change in the European Parliament: Balancing Legislative Ethics and Parliamentary İndependence, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 25 (2), 314-330
  13. Cooper, T.L. (2006), The Responsible Administration: An Approach to Ethics fort he Administrative Role, J.B., 131-163
  14. Dobel J.P. (1999),
  15. Public Integrity, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press Dubnick M.J. (2003), “Accountability And Ethics: Reconsidering the Relationships”, International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior (Fall, 2003), 405-441.
  16. Dunsire A. and Hood C.C. (1989), Cutback Management İn Public Bureaucracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Dye, M. K. (2007), “Corruption and Fraud Detection by Supreme Audit Institutions”, Performance Accountability and Combating Corruption, Washington: The World Bank. European Parliament – OPPD (2012), BENCHMARKING FOR PARLIAMENTS, self- assessment or minimum criteria, OPPD Publisher:
  17. Dick Toornstra, Research and