Politikų įtaka valstybės tarnybai, arba vieno lietuviško tarppartinio nesutarimo istorija

LTStraipsnyje nagrinėjamas ilgametis dviejų didžiausių Lietuvos politinių partijų – Socialdemokratų partijos ir Tėvynės sąjungos nesutarimas dėl aukščiausiųjų valstybės tarnautojų – viceministrų statuso: pirmoji partija juos nori matyti karjeros, antroji – politinio pasitikėjimo tarnautojais. Pirmojoje straipsnio dalyje pateikiama šio nesutarimo istorija, parodant, kaip tapusi valdančiąja, kiekviena iš šių partijų keitė Vyriausybės įstatymą ir su juo susijusius teisės aktus. Antrojoje dalyje bandoma įvertinti kiekvienos partijos požiūrį ir veiksmus. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Karjeros tarnautojai; Karjeros valstybės tarnuatojai; Ministerija; Ministerijų sekretoriai; Politikai; Politinio pasitikėjimo tarnautojai; Valstybės tarnyba; Viceministrai; Vyriausybės įstatymas; Career civil servants; Civil servants of career; Civil servats of political confidence; Civil service, deputy ministers; Law on the Government; Political appointees; Politicians; Public service; Secretaries of ministry; The ministry.

ENThe aim of the article is to show the long-lasting controversy between the largest Lithuanian political parties – the Social Democratic Party and the Homeland Union — about the status of vice-ministers as the highest rank officeholders: the first party sees them as civil servants of career whereas the latter as civil servants of political confidence. The first part of the article is devoted to the history of the controversy which started in 1995 when the newly adopted Law of Civil Servants provided for the classification of all civil servants into two categories. The then ruling Democratic Labour Party (the present Social Democratic Party) included the vice-ministers, who then were called ministry secretaries, into the category of civil servants of career. After winning the elections of 1996, the Homeland Union introduced an office of vice-ministers as civil servants of political confidence. In 2002, the social democrats restored the office of ministry secretaries as civil servants of career. In 2009, the Homeland Union restored the office of vice-ministers as civil officers of political confidence. The second part of the article is an attempt to evaluate the mentioned reorganizations in ministries, giving the following interpretations of the controversy. Firstly, fifteen years ago the Lithuanian party system was strongly polarized, and it was impossible to continue keeping high offices after the change of the ruling parties. Secondly, it is suggested that backing up the idea about the smallest possible number of the political offices in ministries, social democrats actually supported the idea that civil service must be possibly least dependent on the political regime.This idea originates from the administrative tradition of Continental Europe where many countries have lived through long periods of political instability when civil offices of administration acted as stabilizing factors. Increasing the number of offices of administration in ministries, the Homeland Union rather follows the American tradition, reflecting also the new trends in Continental Europe where the number of political appointments has been increasing. Thirdly, the attitude towards the number of civil offices may be based on the public interest to have both politically responsive and professionally responsible bureaucracy. These roles are not easy to harmonize; therefore, preference should be given to one of them. By establishing the offices of political confidence, the Homeland Union demonstrates its preference to political responsiveness. Meanwhile, converting them into offices of career, the Party of Social Democrats supports the idea of professional competence and responsibility of bureaucracy. [From the publication]

• Politikos įgyvendinimas Lietuvoje ir Europos Sąjungos įtaka / Ramūnas Vilpišauskas, Vitalis Nakrošis. Vilnius : Eugrimas, 2003. 210 p.
• Veprių varpai / Libertas Klimka. Vepriai / vyriausiasis redaktorius Venantas Mačiekus. Vilnius: Versmė, 2010. P. 859-870.