Objective imputation when bringing employees of government bodies to legal responsibility

This article analyzes the current practice of disciplining senior civil servants for the mere fact of an incident or the escalation of negative phenomena in their area of responsibility, as well as certain principles of legal liability that are violated by this approach. The negative consequences of the organizational and moral nature of punishments, applied as a deterrent to the bureaucracy and for the sake of formality, are demonstrated. Emphasis is placed on determining the cause-and-effect relationship between the civil servant’s performance of official duties and the negative phenomenon that occurs within their area of responsibility. It is noted that the formula “every incident has a first and last name,” ingrained in public administration practice, continues to be implemented in modern government administration. The rather vague and broad definitions of midlevel management responsibilities allow them to be charged with virtually any work-related infraction committed by their subordinates as misconduct. Specifically, the article cites the wording of provisions of the general military regulations of the Russian Armed Forces, for violation of which military commanders are most often subject to disciplinary action for failing to exercise proper oversight. The author identifies the causes of this bureaucratic management style, which include the simplification of management activities, the desire to emphasize one’s own authority, and the distortion of employees’ legal consciousness. As a result, the process of management influence becomes self-sufficient, losing its purpose and focus on achieving beneficial results. Actual cause-and-effect relationships cease to be taken into account, replaced by statistical reporting data. The so-called “stick system” in many government agencies continues to serve as a benchmark for the performance of civil servants, which leads to a shift in focus from achieving the primary objective to secondary goals. Proposals are made to improve disciplinary practices in the civil service system in order to motivate personnel and retain qualified professionals in the civil service.