Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest
enemy of truth. Ferenc David
The word authority (derived from the Latin word auctoritas) can be used to mean the right to exercise power given by the State (in the form of government, judges, police officers, etc.), or by academic knowledge of an area (someone that can be an authority on a subject). When the word authority is used in the name of an organization, this name usually refers to the governing body upon which such authority is vested... In government, the term authority is often used interchangeably with power. However, their meanings differ: while power is defined as "the ability to influence somebody to do something that he/she would not have done", authority refers to a claim of legitimacy, the justification and right to exercise that power. For example, while a mob has the power to punish a criminal, for example by lynching, people who believe in the rule of law consider that only a court of law has the authority to punish a criminal legally as the law says. According to Michaels in the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, authority is the capacity, innate or acquired for exercising ascendancy over a group. Other scientists argue that. It is power that is sanctioned and institutionalized. Max Weber, in his sociological and philosophical work, identified and distinguished three types of legitimate domination (Herrschaft in German, which generally means 'domination' or 'rule'), that have sometimes been rendered in English translation as types of authority, because domination isn't seen as a political concept in the first place. Weber defined domination (authority) as the chance of commands being obeyed by a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled. In government, the term authority is often used interchangeably with power. However, their meanings differ: while power is defined as "the ability to influence somebody to do something that he/she would not have done", authority refers to a claim of legitimacy, the justification and right to exercise that power. For example, while a mob has the power to punish a criminal, for example by lynching, people who believe in the rule of law consider that only a court of law has the authority to punish a criminal legally as the law says. According to Michaels in the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, authority is the capacity, innate or acquired for exercising ascendancy over a group. Other scientists argue that. It is power that is sanctioned and institutionalized. Max Weber, in his sociological and philosophical work, identified and distinguished three types of legitimate domination (Herrschaft in German, which generally means 'domination' or 'rule'), that have sometimes been rendered in English translation as types of authority, because domination isn't seen as a political concept in the first place. Weber defined domination (authority) as the chance of commands being obeyed by a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled. In government, the term authority is often used interchangeably with power. However, their meanings differ: while power is defined as "the ability to influence somebody to do something that he/she would not have done", authority refers to a claim of legitimacy, the justification and right to exercise that power. For example, while a mob has the power to punish a criminal, for example by lynching, people who believe in the rule of law consider that only a court of law has the authority to punish a criminal legally as the law says. According to Michaels in the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, authority is the capacity, innate or acquired for exercising ascendancy over a group. Other scientists argue that. It is power that is sanctioned and institutionalized. Max Weber, in his sociological and philosophical work, identified and distinguished three types of legitimate domination (Herrschaft in German, which generally means 'domination' or 'rule'), that have sometimes been rendered in English translation as types of authority, because domination isn't seen as a political concept in the first place. Weber defined domination (authority) as the chance of commands being obeyed by a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled.
Types of Authority
- The first type discussed by Weber is Rational-legal authority. It is that form of authority which depends for its legitimacy on formal rules and established laws of the state, which are usually written down and are often very complex. The power of the rational legal authority is mentioned in the constitution. Modern societies depend on legal-rational authority. Government officials are the best example of this form of authority, which is prevalent all over the world.
- The second type of authority is Traditional authority, which derives from long-established customs, habits and social structures. When power passes from one generation to another, then it is known as traditional authority. The right of hereditary monarchs to rule furnishes an obvious example. The Tudor dynasty in England... and the ruling families of Yoruba, in Nigeria are some examples of traditional authority.
- The third form of authority is Charismatic authority. Here, the charisma of the individual or the leader plays an important role. Charismatic authority is that authority which is derived from "the gift of grace" or when the leader claims that his authority is derived from a "higher power" (e.g. God or natural law or rights) or "inspiration", that is superior to both the validity of traditional and rational-legal authority and followers accept this and are willing to follow this higher or inspired authority, in the place of the authority that they have hitherto been following...
You can delegate authority, but you can never delegate responsibility for delegating a task to someone else. If you picked the right man, fine, but if you picked the wrong man, the responsibility is yours—not his. Richard E. Krafve
Weber divided legitimate authority into three types:
Sources of Authority
(1) Authority can be created either expressly or by implication; (2) public entities act publicly, using the same means to communicate the grant of authority to their agents that they use to communicate this to third parties; (3) apparent authority describes the situation when a principal has placed restrictions on an agent that are not known to a third party; (4) restrictions on government agents are accomplished in the open, through laws and regulations; (5) everyone, including contractors, are supposed to know the laws and regulations of our government; and thus (6) the concept of third parties, shattering any appearance of authority as well as that of "apparent authority" is often inapt when dealing with the government, insofar as the only cognizable restrictions on the agent's authority are deemed known
My view: why should an appointee that was screened by the National Assembly, decided in his own volition or by unknown advisers to declined the invitation to appear before the committee that was put in charge of investigating the misappropriation of fund meant for IDPs?The committee's letter had categorically summoned the Secretary to the Federal Government and his company apparently in reference to the letter of President Muhamadu Buhari in January, which alleged lack of fair hearing on the part of the Senate. The summon read: "The Senate at its sitting on October 4, debated on a motion 'mounting on humanitarian crisis in the North-East'after which an ad-hoc committee was constituted."The Committee was to conducted a public hearing in order to ascertain how much has been released to the Presidential Initiative on North-East and also to ascertain how fund have been utilized from inception till date.The committee was also expected to investigate the diversion of grains and other food items from the Strategic Grains Reserves, NEMA and other sources for the IDPs."Consequently, the committee held three-day public hearing between December 6 and 8, 2016, although some of the invited stakeholders refused to attend."Below is the letter sent to the senate ad-hoc committee:
...I wish to draw your attention of the other members of your committee that I will not be able to appear before the committee primarily because I have gone to court to challenge the invitation among others.Please find the attached documents."Please, accept my highest regards."
Where is the humility and respect for the proper authority? Why should public office holder who was selected defies the legislature that serves as check and also to check accountability?
Day by day, death knell of anti-corruption is sounding!
Information from wikipedia and The Nigerian Tribune was used in this write-up!
Comments
Post a Comment