For example, it is not uncommon for faculty appointments and promotions committees at this university to reject as unqualified candidates proposed by chairpersons, only to see the administration override those recommendations. There is even at least one sitting chair at this university who had been rejected by the faculty appointments and promotions committee. The complete removal of faculty from crucial decision-making processes is not in the best interest of achieving a high quality faculty. Academic freedom also suffers from the administration's assault on academic principles. Rather than being forward-looking, this administration looks to procedures abolished in 1641 for guidance, with a mentality reminiscent of totalitarianism.
Accountability is also the loser in the administration's position.
If anything, the deans should be protesting at being put in an untenable position that has the appearance of conflict of interest, and will never be perceived as fair and impartial, no matter how well-intentioned the dean may be. The administration proposal is a prescription for loss of accountability. This is academic malpractice, and must be rejected.