The Politics of Ethics in Philippine Government Public Service

The Nature and goal of Ethics in Public Service

There are two ways to look at public service ethics. The first refers to a set of requirements that public workers must meet to follow a specific pattern of behavior. The law dictates this particular pattern of action. This assumption essentially refers to how public workers should conduct themselves when doing their jobs. The second relates to a specific structure or technique that is used to apply the established norms or regulations. It necessitates structured behavior from the public servant in this circumstance. The purpose of prescribing norms and regulations in a specific framework is to shape public servant behavior in this way.

In the Philippine Governance, a proposed model for Public Service Ethics

Certain administrative adjustments are required to improve Philippine public sector ethics. According to Maesschalck (2004), the condition of public service ethics in governance is largely determined by the state's administrative reforms, which range from the concept of public administration to public management principles.

Maesschalck, (2004) interposes the feasibility of public ethics to function effectively within these constraints (as described in modern public management). Competition within public agencies and between them and private companies, performance-based management, and the transformation of the function of the public administrator to that of a public entrepreneur/manager will set the tone for successful public ethics.

Public ethics analysis in the Philippines

Public ethics can be characterized in the Philippines by defining its moral ascendancy to govern and the stages of the advertiser's ethics. The RA 3019, the 'Code for Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public Officials and Working People,' and the Anti-Corruption Practices Act of the 1960s and the RA6713, as stated in the corresponding literature since it was adopted in 1991, has shown no significant improvement to the ethics of the public service. It has worsened to a large degree. 

Conclusions

• Moral development is only in conformity with public standards and rules.
• It has never been compliant or graduated from the level of integrity and institutional ethics culture.
• The heads of agencies play an administrative role as the heads of public administration.
• Public perception tends to demonstrate declining confidence in governance.

Recommendations

Incentives for performance should be put in place to develop hard work, hard work, honesty, and senior officials. The heads of the Agency must be a model for and witness to the dimensions of good governance: transparency and accountability to create credibility and to keep track of what ethics means as a public servant. To develop and build public trust in governance, supervision and regulatory institutions should be consistent in regulating malfeasance or misfeasance by public officials. Finally, to find out the specific dimensions of public servant ethics, a more detailed study is required.