The oath of office is perhaps the ultimate means to set public office apart: Public functionaries in most countries have to swear to let public interests prevail over private concerns. This seems at odds with the prevailing liberal/managerial idea that public and private employment is not distinct at all. The oath of office establishes a moral commitment to the office that transcends a contractual, managerial, and/or legal approach to public authority. It signifies the guardianship of public officers and links personal conscience with public values and public interests. This article concludes that we should guard against using an oath of office as a remedy against increased reliance on private interests and motivations; rather the latter may endanger a public service ethics and annul any meaning and function an oath may still represent to begin with.
Alford, J., & Hughes, O. ( 2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management . American Review of Public Administration, 28, 130-148.
2.
Bauer, B. ( 1884). Der Eid. Eine Studie [The oath. A study]. Heidelberg, Germany: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung .
3.
Beck Jørgensen, T.B., & Bozeman, B. ( 2007). The public values universe: An inventory. Administration & Society, 39, 354-381.
4.
Bentham, J. ( 2005). "Swear not at all" containing an exposure of the mischievousness as well as antichristianity of the ceremony of an oath. London: Elibron Classics. (Original work published 1817)
5.
Berlin, I. ( 1998). The proper study of mankind. An anthology of essays. New York: Douglas & McIntyre.
6.
Bozeman, B. ( 2007). Public values and public interest. Counterbalancing economic individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
7.
Buitengewoon normal: Rapport van de werkgroep "Normalisatie rechtspositie overheidspersoneel" [Exceptional normal. Report by the workgroup on ‘normalization of legal status of public functionaries]. (2005). Interdepartementaal Beleidsonderzoek 2004-2005, nr. 6
8.
Ernste, G.W. ( 1895). Eed of verklaring [Oath or affirmation]. Amsterdam: H. Eisendrath.
9.
Fox, C.J., & Cochran, C.E. ( 1990). Discretionary public administration. Toward a Platonic guardian class? In H. D. Kass & B. L. Catron (Eds), Images and identities in public administration (pp. 87-112). New-bury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Friesenhahn, E. ( 1928/1979). Der politische Eid [The political oath] . Darmstadt, Germany: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
11.
Garofalo, C. ( 2008, May). Public values, judgment, and action: Prison privatization in the United States. Paper presented at the Research Workshop on Public Values and Public Interest, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Geuss, R. ( 2001). Public goods, private goods. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
Hampshire, S. ( 1989). Innocence and experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
Harmon, M.M. ( 1995). Responsibility as paradox. A critique of rational discourse on government. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
Hirzel, R. ( 1902). Der Eid. Ein Beitrag zu seiner Geschichte. Leipzig, Germany: Hirzel.
17.
Honecker, M. ( 1968). Der Eid heute angesichts seiner reformatorischen Beurteilung und der abendländischen Eidestradition [The oath nowadays in then light of its assesment in the reformation and the Western oath tradition]. In G. Niemeier (Ed.), Ich schwöre. Theologische und jursitische Studien zur Eidsfrage (pp. 27-92). Munich , Germany: Kaiser Verlag.
18.
Holloway, R. ( 1999). Godless morality. Keeping religion out of ethics. Edinburgh, UK: Cannongate.
19.
Jacobs, J. ( 1992). Systems of survival. A dialogue on the moral foundations of commerce and politics. New York: Vintage Books.
20.
Kolmer, L. ( 1989). Der promissorische Eid im Mittelalter [The promissory oath in the middle ages] (Regensburger Historische Forschungen 12). Regensburg, Germany: Kallmünz.
21.
Light, P.C. ( 2008). A government ill executed: The depletion of the Federal Service. Public Administration Review, 68, 413-419.
22.
Menzel, D.C. ( 2006). Ethics management for public administrators. Building organizations of integrity. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
23.
Miles, S.H. ( 2004). The Hippocratic oath and the ethics of medicine. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
24.
Niessen, C.R. ( 2003). Ambtenaar in de overheidsorganisatie [Civil servants in the govenement organization]. Deventer, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
25.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ( 2002). Public service as an employer of choice. Retrieved September 17, 2009, from http://www.oecd.org/document/10/0,3343,en_2649_34139_2095050_1_1_1_1,00.html
26.
Pesch, U. ( 2005). The predicaments of publicness. An inquiry into the conceptual ambiguity of public administration. Delft, The Netherlands: Eburon.
27.
Plescia, J. ( 1970). The oath and perjury in ancient Greece. Tallahassee: Florida State University Press.
28.
Prodi, P. (Ed.). (1993). Glaube und Eid. Treueformeln, Glaubensbekenntnisse und Sozialdisziplinierung zwischen Mittelalter und Neuzeit [Beleif and Oath]. Munich , Germany: Oldenbough.
29.
Rohr, J.A. ( 1986). To run a constitution. The legitimacy of the administrative state. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
30.
Self, P. ( 1982). Administrative theories and politics; an enquiry into the structure and processes of modern government. (3rd ed.). London: Allen & Unwin .
Steinberger, P.J. ( 2004). The idea of the state. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Stoker, G. ( 2006). Public value management: A new narrative for network government. American Review of Public Administration, 36, 41/57.
34.
Svara, J. ( 2006). The ethics primer for public administrators in government and nonprofit organizations. Boston: Jones & Bartlett.
35.
Thomas, W.I. ( 1951). The methodology of behavior study. In E. H. Volkart & W. I. Thomas (Eds.), Social behavior and personality. Contributions of W.I. Thomas to theory and social research (pp. 70-82). New York: Social Research Council. (Original work published 1932)
36.
Tyler, J.E. ( 1834). Oaths; their origins, nature, and history. London: J. W. Parker.
37.
Van den Doel, H.W. ( 1989). Geschiedenis van de ambtseed [History of the oath of office]. Bestuur, 8, 220-222.
38.
Van Leeuwen, E.H. ( 1881). De eed en de moderne staat: eene studie [The oath in the modern state. A study]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: C.H.E. Breijer.
39.
Von Mises, L. ( 1946). Bureaucracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
40.
Wal van der, Z., & de Graaf, G. ( 2007). The bureaucrat, the businessperson, and their perceptions of each other’s value orientation. Empirical notions on the other sector’s most important organizational values. Public Integrity, 2007, 1, 45-60.
41.
Walzer, M. ( 1973). Political action. The problem of dirty hands. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 2, 160-180
42.
Weber, M. ( 1985). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaf; Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie [Society & Economy]. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr.
