> while public servants can only do what’s explicitly permitted.
I think that is determined by structure of legal system, many systems the public servants can do whatever they want in pursuit of policy goals that has not been expressly forbidden, but of course should be able to make the case that it was in support of those goals.
Indeed - they have some very limited freedom, but the policy goals increase in detail on every level from the top and, with that, the set of allowable actions is reduced.
For instance, let's imagine you want to add a feedback form to a website - you need to track the data collected, make sure it's used only in the appropriate legal ways, that the infrastructure to host the data is procured within the budget already set up, and so on. They need to tread carefully not to step outside what government is authorized to do.
This is why I got involved in government work in the first place - free and open-source at least eased the procurement step - we only needed to prove the software was adequate and would not do anything not permitted by the rules that governed the adopting org.
You're right, I was erroneously conflating civil liability with generic personal consequences but the fact stands that the bits of government that have the most ability to act unilaterally in pursuit of doing their jobs without fear of personal consequence are some of the worst behaved.
I think that is determined by structure of legal system, many systems the public servants can do whatever they want in pursuit of policy goals that has not been expressly forbidden, but of course should be able to make the case that it was in support of those goals.