Abstract

This paper discusses the semantic distinctions between ‘accountability’ and ‘responsibility’, and the related but distinct Dutch concepts of ‘verantwoording’ and ‘verantwoordelijkheid’. The latter concepts are then used to analyse the current debate on the ministerial responsibility for civil servants. Ankersmit’s proposal to limit article 42 Grw to the head of state is correct in theory, but would not have any effect in practice. Ministers are often called to account for their civil servants, but over the past fifty years no single minister has ever been forced to resign by parliament solely because of the mistakes made by his civil servants. Ankersmit’s proposal therefore is already part of the unwritten parliamentary practices