Fair and effective public administration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54201/iajas.v2i1.45Keywords:
good public administration, due process, client protection, judicial reviewAbstract
Administrative procedure is classically the area of law where public administration has direct contact with citizens. Consequently, these cases entail a risk of violating the fundamental rights of citizens, which is certainly not desirable in a constitutional state. In today's administrative systems, administrative procedural law is becoming increasingly important. In practice, the main trends are limiting the executive power of the state to constitutional limits, guaranteeing the fundamental rights of citizens, and creating "good public administration".
For many, the question may arise: are good administrative procedures merely a desirable moral objective, without any legal effect, or are there legal elements that make it both binding and effective?
References
Bárd, K. (2004). Igazság, igazságosság és tisztességes eljárás. Fundamentum, 8(8), 1–44.
Beatson, J., Matthews, M., & Elliott, M. (2002). Administrative Law. Text and materials [Third edition]. Oxford University Press.
Bibó, I. (2016). Jogszerű közigazgatás, eredményes közigazgatás, erős végrehajtó hatalom. In Dénes, I. Z. (ed.), Bibó István összegyűjtött írásai 1. Az Európai politikai fejlődés értelme. Kalligram.
Bibó, I. (2011). Kényszer, jog, szabadság. In Debreczeni, J. (ed.) Bibó-breviárium. Szemelvények Bibó István műveiből. Alexandra.
Bignami, F. (2004). Three generations of participation rights before the European Commission. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(1), 61–83.
Cananea, G. D. (2003). Beyond the state: the Europeanization and globalization of procedural administrative law. European Public Law, 9(4), 563–578. https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2003042
Cassese, S. (2004). European administrative proceedings. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(1), 21–36.
Craig, P. (2004). A new framework for EU administration: the financial regulation 2002. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(1), 107–133.
Fortsakis, T. (2005). Principles governing good administration. European Public Law, 11(2), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2005019
Harlow, C., & Rawlings, R. (1997). Law and administration [2nd edition]. Butterworths.
Harlow, C. (2006). Global administrative law: the quest for principles and values. European Journal of International Law, 17(1), 187–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi158
Ibáñez, A. J. G. (2000). A közösségi jog ellenőrzése és végrehajtása. A nemzeti és az európai közigazgatások szerepe. Osiris Kiadó.
Kanska, K. (2004). Towards Administrative Human Rights in the EU. Impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. European Law Journal, 10(3), 296–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2004.00218.x
Kilényi, G. (1991). A közigazgatási bíráskodás néhány kérdése. Magyar Közigazgatás, 41(4), 296–303.
Kirkham, R. (2004). Prevention is better than litigation: the importance of good administration. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 26(3), 301–311.
Millett, L. (2002). The right to good administration in European Law. Public Law, No. 2. (Summer), 309–322.
Petrik, F. (1991). A közigazgatási bíráskodás. Magyar Közigazgatás, 41(4), 289–295.
Ponce, J. (2005). Good administration and administrative procedures. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 12(2), 551–588. https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2005.12.2.551
Sári, J. (1995). A hatalommegosztás történelmi dimenziói és mai értelme, avagy az alkotmányos rendszerek belső logikája. Osiris Kiadó.
Schwarze, J. (2004). Judicial review of European administrative procedure. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(1), 85–106.
de La Serre, E. B. (2006). Procedural justice in the European Community case-law concerning the rights of the defence: essentialist and instrumental trends. European Public Law, 12(2), 225–250. https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2006015
Shapiro, M. (1996). Codification of administrative law: the US and the Union. European Law Journal, 2(1), 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.1996.tb00017.x
Solé, J. P. (2002). Good administration and European public law. The fight for quality in the field of administrative decisions. European Review of Public Law, 14(4), 1507.
Szaniszló, K. (2017). Államszervezeti fogalmak útvesztőjében. Jogállamiság, népszuverenitás – egy lehetséges értelmezés. JURA, 23(2), 421–434. Online: http://real.mtak.hu/73097/6/421_Jura_JURA_2017_2.pdf
Takács, A. (1993). A hatalommegosztás elvének alkotmányelméleti értelmezése II. Jogtudományi Közlöny, 48(7), 261–272.
Verebélyi, I. (2004). A jó kormányzás néhány jellemzője. Magyar Közigazgatás, 54(5), 298–304.
Legal sources
European Convention on Human Rights
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Constitution of the Republic of Hungary
The Fundamental Law of Hungary
Article LIV of 1868 on the Code of Civil Legislative Procedure
Article XXXIII of 1896 on the Code of Criminal Procedure
Article I of 1911 on the Code of Civil Procedure
Constitutional Court Decision No. 11/1992 (III. 5.)
Constitutional Court Decision No. 75/1995 (XII. 21.)
Constitutional Court Decision No. 6/1998 (III. 11.)
Constitutional Court Decision No. 14/2002 (III. 20.)
Constitutional Court Decision No. 15/2002 (III. 29.)
Constitutional Court Decision No. 35/2002 (VII. 19.)
Constitutional Court Decisions No. 14/2004 (V. 7.),
Constitutional Court Decision No. 21/2014 (VII. 15.)
Judgment of 21 November 1991 in Technische Universität v Hauptzollamt München-Mitte, C-269/90, EU:C:1991:438.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Péter Váczi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
