Publication details
Criteria, the Scope and Efficiency of review of Administrative Decisions within the Public Administration
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2015 |
| Type | Appeared in Conference without Proceedings |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | Internal review of administrative decisions in the area of the Czech public administration is significantly determined by the tradition. The same goes for relatively new general procedural law (2004), which keeps the model of two-instance administrative review, including the fundamentals of procedural part. This new law also brings some modern elements, which reflect the requirements of fair procedure and good administration. However, these elements are usually not clearly understood by the administrative practice (authorities). The above-stated can also be applied on the criteria of review of administrative decisions. With the new law, such criteria were expanded and now they consist not only of traditional legality, but also of „correctness (suitability)“. The content and the scope of principle of legality, as principles for the conduct of administrative authorities are now explicitly expressed in the law, is in accordance with the desired requirements. However, experience from administrative practice and case-law does not persuade us that the stated standards are being thoroughly followed. The paper deals with the role of the review administrative authorities in the process of the desired qualitative changes, and with how those authorities fulfill such role. The paper is based on the setting of criteria for review of administrative decisions (as well as measures of general nature), the paper follows application of such criteria, and relevant case-law (which is extensive). Firstly, the paper analyzes regular remedial measures (decisions that are not in force), then it assesses the review of administrative decisions that are in force. The paper deals with what changes the principles of good administration and the European administrative space have brought into setting and effect of criteria of review (right to a fair trial, especially in the area of administrative punishment). What evaluation criteria are applied by the administrative authorities and what defects of decision and procedure (the type, the intensity) lead to quashing or changing such decision? What principles are found as critical for the desired quality of the procedure and decisions in the administrative practice? How are suitability and effect of those principles and criteria evaluated by the administrative courts (two-instance), and by the Constitutional Court? What changes and shift have been made in the area of protection of individual rights of the administrative proceedings’ participants? What is the importance of the argumentation contained in the appeals and other means of protection? How are those „new“ requirements reflected in the argumentation of the higher (review) administrative authorities? In the scope of these individual research questions, the paper deals with the efficiency of the internal administrative review system. Those are the research question of this paper. These questions are answered with the use of jurisprudence, commentaries (the doctrine) and the case-law of administrative courts and the Constitutional Court. Available data from administrative authorities (mainly the review authorities) will be used. Comparative analysis with selected countries (German, Austria) is used for assessing (comparing) the suitability of protection of individuals’ rights, the efficiency of administrative procedures and possible simplification of such procedures. |
| Related projects: |