Accountability theory
Introduction
In public administration and political science, accountability or democratic accountability refers to the process in which all citizens monitor and evaluate the responsible actions of public servants through mechanisms such as transparency and oversight. To avoid abuse of power, it implies the possibility of punishing unwanted results through specialized government bodies or courts, the vote of citizens and public opinion. It is currently considered a necessary mechanism for the functioning of democracy and the fight against corruption.
As part of governance, it is a central aspect related to public, nonprofit, and private sector issues. In leadership roles, accountability is the recognition and assumption of responsibility for actions, products, decisions and policies, including administration, governance and implementation within the scope of the role or job, and encompassing the obligation to report, justify and be responsible for the resulting consequences.[1].
Background
The origins of accountability could be traced back to Egyptian and Athenian references, but some authors point out that the closest antecedent to the modern concept occurred in England under the reign of William I. This monarch requested that the owners of his kingdom render an account of their possessions to value them and list them in the Domesday Books. In addition to fiscal purposes, such accountability was accompanied by all landowners swearing allegiance to the king and, at the beginning of the century, this system evolved into a highly centralized administrative reign governed through a centralized audit and with the obligation of a semiannual delivery of accounts.[2].
Another point of view points out that a more precise discussion of the topic occurred in The Federalist, because although the term has appeared sporadically in English politics and how to limit power is discussed in several previous political texts, only in the discussions of the founding fathers of the United States is reference made to a system of representative government that considers tools to limit its different branches of power. In these writings Hamilton contrasted the power of a king without the need or obligation to answer for his actions with the idea of a republic in which each magistrate is responsible for his actions while in office. Madison states that since citizens have the power to delegate authority to the government, it acquires the responsibility of promoting the general interest and the people have the right to hold their representatives accountable.[3].