The law on administrative procedure regulates the processes through which administrative decisions and administrative projects are elaborated. It is more and more regarded as essential in ...administrative laws: it is really considered as the central part of it in some systems. In many jurisdictions, rules concerning administrative procedure are codified, gathered in a single piece of general legislation: in a few, it remains non codified.The book is made of the different contributions presented on the topic to the last congress of the International Academy of International Law (Taipei, 2012): national reports on twenty countries and a general report.These contributions examine the way administrative procedure became codified, the obstacles which had to be overcome, the main orientations of the codes, their evolution in time; alternatively, they explain why administrative procedure is not codified.Providing extensive materials on an issue which is a concern in many administrative laws and many administrative systems, the book is intended for all searchers and experts in administrative law and public management, whether academics or practitioners.
Federal agencies have taken steps to include the public in a wide range of environmental decisions. Although some form of public participation is often required by law, agencies usually have broad ...discretion about the extent of that involvement. Approaches vary widely, from holding public information-gathering meetings to forming advisory groups to actively including citizens in making and implementing decisions.
Proponents of public participation argue that those who must live with the outcome of an environmental decision should have some influence on it. Critics maintain that public participation slows decision making and can lower its quality by including people unfamiliar with the science involved.
This book concludes that, when done correctly, public participation improves the quality of federal agencies' decisions about the environment. Well-managed public involvement also increases the legitimacy of decisions in the eyes of those affected by them, which makes it more likely that the decisions will be implemented effectively. This book recommends that agencies recognize public participation as valuable to their objectives, not just as a formality required by the law. It details principles and approaches agencies can use to successfully involve the public.
This groundbreaking book is the first to look at administration and administrative law in the earliest days of the American republic. Contrary to conventional understandings, Mashaw demonstrates that ...from the very beginning Congress delegated vast discretion to administrative officials and armed them with extrajudicial adjudicatory, rulemaking, and enforcement authority. The legislative and administrative practices of the U.S. Constitution's first century created an administrative constitution hardly hinted at in its formal text. Beyond describing a history that has previously gone largely unexamined, this book, in the author's words, will "demonstrate that there has been no precipitous fall from a historical position of separation-of-powers grace to a position of compromise; there is not a new administrative constitution whose legitimacy should be understood as not only contestable but deeply problematic."
<!CDATA Presidents of nations with constitutionally imposed term limits are often viewed as growing weaker as they approach the end of their time in office. However, in this important new study, ...political scientist Genevieve M. Kehoe argues that because such chief executives are free from reelection constraint and often still enthusiastic to create a legacy by pursuing bold projects, they may accomplish significant initiatives. Kehoe has developed a concept for this which she calls “Terminal Logic Behavior” (TLB). Presidents and Terminal Logic Behavior: Term Limits and Executive Action in the United States , Brazil, and Argentina provides both case studies and quantitative evidence to show how US presidents of the last three decades have utilized decrees on foreign, domestic, and environment policy during their final months in office. She finds a systematic pattern of decree use consistent with the mark of TLB in a most unexpected place—presidents’ use of national emergency powers. In a careful comparative analysis, she also finds support for her argument in the Argentinean and Brazilian experience of the same period. >
Abstract
After years of debate, the Aarhus Regulation has finally been reformed. This article focuses on the amendments to the scope of application of the Regulation’s internal review and access to ...justice provisions, and demonstrates that these are the most important changes introduced by the reform. Not only do these amendments mark an important development towards full compliance by the European Union (EU) with its obligations under the Aarhus Convention; they also fill a vacuum, and solve the main problem which lay at the heart of the EU system of access to justice in environmental public interest cases. First, the article explores the obstacles faced by different stakeholders seeking access to the EU Courts by reference to specific categories of EU environmental law and risk regulation acts. This provides a systemic overview of different problematic aspects associated with different scenarios, unpacking all relevant implications. Secondly, it embraces a pragmatic perspective and draws a clear distinction between challenges to legislative and regulatory acts. Against the backdrop of this examination, the article identifies the main problem of the EU system: the application of the ‘complete system of legal remedies’ rationale to the specific case of regulatory acts. Further, it highlights that there is no ‘interpretative’ way out of the TFEU conundrum. Thirdly, the article analyses the Commission’s disappointing proposal for a reform of the Aarhus Regulation and the final text of the 2021 amendments to the Regulation. The story has a (surprisingly) happy ending. The EU institutions have finally acknowledged the main problem in the system of access to the EU Courts in environmental matters, and recognized the need to solve it in the specific context of the Aarhus Regulation.
China's food safety system is in crisis. Egregious scandals, as varied as the sale of liquor laced with Viagra and the distribution of fake eggs, reveal how regulatory practices have been stretched ...to their limit in the world's largest food production system. On Feeding the Masses focuses on the oft-cited but ultimately overlooked concept of scale to identify the root causes of China's regulatory failures in food safety. The 'politics of scale' framework highlights how regulators disagree on which level of government is best suited to regulate ('the scale of governance'), struggle to address multilevel tensions ('multidimensional scale integration'), and fail to understand how policies at one level of government can affect other levels of government in unexpected and costly ways ('scale externalities'). Drawing from over 200 interviews with food safety regulators and producers, the study provides one of the most comprehensive accounts of China's food safety crisis to date.
The core animating feature of administrative justice scholarship is the desire to understand how justice is achieved through the delivery of public services and the actions, inactions, and ...decision-making of administrative bodies. The study of administrative justice also encompasses the redress systems by which people can challenge administrative bodies to seek the correction of injustices. For a long time now, scholars have been interested in administrative justice, but without necessarily framing their work as such. Rather than existing under the rubric of administrative justice, much of the research undertaken has existed within sub-categories of disciplines, such as law, sociology, public policy, politics, and public administration. Consequently, although aspects of the topic have attracted rich contributions across such disciplines, administrative justice has rarely been studied or taught in a manner that integrates these areas of research more systematically. This Handbook signals a major change of approach. Drawing together a group of world-leading scholars of administrative justice from a range of disciplines, The Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice shows how administrative justice is a vibrant, complex, and contested field that is best understood as an area of inquiry in its own right, rather than through traditional disciplinary silos.
THE PROCEDURE FETISH Bagley, Nicholas
Michigan law review,
12/2019, Letnik:
118, Številka:
3
Journal Article
The strict procedural rules that characterize modern administrative law are said to be necessary to sustain the fragile legitimacy of a powerful and constitutionally suspect administrative state. We ...are likewise told that they are essential to public accountability because they prevent factional interests from capturing agencies. Yet the legitimacy-and-accountability narrative at the heart of administrative law is both overdrawn and harmful. Procedural rules have a role to play in preserving legitimacy and discouraging capture, but they advance those goals more obliquely than is commonly assumed and may exacerbate the very problems they aim to fix. This Article aims to draw into question the administrative lawyer's instinctive faith in procedure, to reorient discussion to the trade-offs at the heart of any system designed to structure government action, and to soften resistance to a reform agenda that would undo counterproductive procedural rules. Administrative law could achieve more by doing less.
This book, written by a leading expert of comparative administrative law, provides an insightful analysis of the common and distinctive traits among the administrative laws of Europe.
The article is devoted to a scientific and theoretical study of the principles of administrative legal proceedings in the updated conditions of the Ukrainian State development, based on the needs for ...high-quality provision and implementation of legal rights, freedoms and interests of individuals and legal entities in the field of public law relations. It has been established that the principles of administrative proceedings at the current stage of development of administrative procedural law should be understood as the basic, initial rules which are stipulated by the provisions of national legislation, as well as generally accepted provisions of international law and standards of administration of justice, and which determine the organisational and functional (procedural) conditions for the administration of justice in administrative cases, and which are reflected and enshrined in the relevant provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine. It has been noted that by their functional purpose, the principles of administrative justice form a stable basis for the functioning of the mechanism of administrative and procedural regulation.
Based on the analysis of the existing scientific developments on this issue, the author supports and further develops the scientific position on determining the characteristic features inherent in the principles of administrative justice in the modern context, namely a) each principle is based on a certain idea, determined by the socio-legal and ideological values of public life, the state and law at this stage of development and functioning; b) the principles have an external expression, i.e. they are textually concentrated in the norms of administrative procedure legislation and reflect the content, essence and internal structure of administrative proceedings, the entire process of the dynamics of its implementation; c) the principles perform a safeguarding function, as they contribute to the main task of administrative proceedings to ensure the proper level of exercise and protection of individuals and legal entities of their rights, freedoms and legitimate interests from violations by public authorities; d) each principle should be logical and scientifically grounded, internally balanced, aimed at ensuring the orderly administration of justice in administrative cases, while not repeating the content of other principles of administrative justice and not contradicting each other.