Effective Law from a Regulatory and Administrative Law Perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria DE BENEDETTO
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Sociology Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Regulatory Perspective ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Behavioural Sciences

The question of effective law has been studied in many fields of research, such as philosophy and sociology of law, law and economics, public policy and behavioural sciences. This article aims to treat it as a genuine administrative law issue which is currently having a significant impact on administrative procedures, especially affecting the way in which rules are adopted and implemented. Furthermore, the article attempts to reconcile conflicting views in existing literature on the meaning of effective law and on which factors lead to effectiveness by proposing an integrated approach: starting from a regulatory perspective it considers both traditional determinants of effectiveness, ie compliance and enforcement, as well as the emerging aspect of outcomes, focused on the idea that a rule can be defined as effective when its desired effects have been achieved and the public interest which justifies the rule has been safeguarded without producing unwanted or disfunctional consequences.Far from being simply a decisional problem for institutions (arising in legislative, regulatory and administrative procedures), effectiveness calls for a “steering administration” and represents a criterion for decision-making, since expected effectiveness can be used in the logic of “whether” and “how” institutions should arrive at decisions.

Deliberative Democracy and Public Dispute Resolution

2018 ◽  
pp. 709-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Susskind ◽  
Jessica Gordon ◽  
Yasmin Zaerpoor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Fact Finding

Deliberative democracy and public dispute resolution (PDR) have the same goal—to inform and determine the public interest—but they involve different skills and practices. This article considers the ways in which deliberative democratic approaches to policy-related decision-making can be supplemented with tools used in public dispute resolution—specifically, the use of an independent mediator, the well-developed technique of stakeholder assessment, and a new strategy called joint fact-finding, where stakeholders with different interests work together with outside experts to identify common assumptions, gather information together, and formulate and clarify opinions. All are designed to achieve fairer, wiser, more stable and more efficient outcomes.

scholarly journals Through a Glass Darkly: The Role and Review of "National Security" Concepts in Canadian Law

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Forcese
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
National Security ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Precise Meaning ◽  
Canadian Law ◽  
Real Importance ◽  
The Government

The expression "national security" or its close similes lacks a precise meaning, even in the public policy literature. Nevertheless, the concept appears in over 30 federal statutes. In most instances, the term is undefined, an important oversight in light of the significant powers these statutes accord the government. Under these circumstances, how courts review government invocations of "national security" is of real importance. With some exceptions, courts applying s. 7 of the Charter and standard administrative law doctrines have accorded substantial deference to government national security determinations. When largely deferential substantive review of the ambiguous concept of national security is coupled with the ex parti and in camera context in which these cases are often heard, the net effect is to leave government with a freer hand in national security matters than in other domains of administrative decision making. Several possible responses to this problem are proposed.

scholarly journals DETERMINING INDIVIDUAL CATEGORIES OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC REGISTRATION OF CIVIL STATES WITH ACCOUNTING OF LEGISLATIVE TRANSFORMATIONS

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-173
Author(s):  
O. H. Pohrebniak
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Modern Development ◽  
The Status ◽  
Civil Status ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
State Registration ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Theoretical Developments

The article defines certain peculiarities of administrative proceedings of state registration of marriage and establishment of paternity in Ukraine. It has been established that the procedures for state registration of acts of civil status are types of administrative procedures, it should first be noted that the general normative act which should define the notions and peculiarities of such procedures should be the Law of Ukraine “On the administrative procedure” 2018, which at present time is a project and submitted to the VerkhovnaRada of Ukraine for consideration. As a rule, scholars agree that the administrative procedure is directly related to the activities of the public administration and is an established algorithm for the functioning of the subjects of power. In this case, the procedures for state registration of acts of civil status are no exception. They are a kind of administrative procedures and implemented by state authorities, and in certain cases, and by local self-government bodies. At the same time having its own peculiarities regarding the procedure for implementation and the subject structure of such procedures. It has been established that the modern development of domestic administrative legislation and the practice of its application testifies that at present the administrative procedure as an independent component of administrative law has not yet been fully formed, although, given the active theoretical developments of the representatives of the administrative and legal science on the pages of scientific, journalistic and educational publications concerning the concept, features, types and structure of administrative procedures, and referring to the active legislative development of this tyranny, it is safe to say that the process of the administrative procedure in the structure of administrative law is actively continuing. Therefore, on the basis of theoretical developments and practical features, the author’s understanding of the concept of “administrative procedure of state registration of acts of civil status” is determined. In addition, given the specific features of administrative proceedings for state registration of civil status acts, as well as for a more complete clarification of the status and authority of all participants in certain administrative procedures, the necessary additional introduction of the concept of “implementation of the administrative procedure” is argued. Such category will allow to find out the place, role and authority not only of the administrative body, but also other participants in administrative proceedings. Thus, under the implementation of an administrative procedure, it should be understood as the observance, execution, use and application of procedural steps directed at the consideration and resolution of an administrative case.

scholarly journals In the name of the public: Representatives of collective and wider interest of the public in administrative matters in Serbia

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 504-531
Author(s):  
Jelena Jerinić
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Interested Party ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Active Approach ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Direct Indication ◽  
Administrative Procedures

Serbian Law on General Administrative Procedure (LGAP) opened a possibility for broadening the standing in administrative procedures and administrative disputes, by inclusion of subjects representing collective interests and interest of the wider public - primarily, citizen associations and similar organizations. However, by failing to regulate a series of concrete issues, the Law places the administration and the Administrative Court before a challenge, demanding from them an extensive interpretation of not only LGAP's provisions, but other legislation already recognizing such organizations as AIDS in realization of the public interest. The author analyzes relevant legislation, as well as available administrative and court caselaw in search of these answers. The lack of explicit legal provisions could be balanced by a creative approach in practice, especially by the Administrative Court. Having in mind comparative solutions, the question arises whether it is necessary to regulate this category of potential parties separately or to link it more explicitly to the already existing notion of an interested party. Instead, completely new notions have been introduced - collective interests and the wider interests of the public - which are not or not consistently defined in Serbian law. The current, not so voluminous case law, shows that the administrative bodies need a more direct indication of the rules, i.e. a more explicit definitions of these terms. However, despite the restrictive legal framework, administrative bodies should be open to understanding the specific circumstances, i.e. the motivation that an organization has when it seeks standing. In the normative sphere, one of the solutions could be to envisage the analogous application of LGAP's provisions on the interested party. Other solutions could be sought in explicitly mentioning them in the provisions on right to appeal. The current formulations of LGAP do not provide sufficient guidance to the administration and an extensive interpretation would be a great challenge for them. An active approach of the Administrative Court could show the way for the administration toward and effective application of these provisions of LGAP.

Prison Crowding and the Evolution of Public Policy

1985 ◽  
Vol 478 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOAN MULLEN
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Budget Constraints ◽  
The Public ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
Eighth Amendment ◽  
The Future ◽  
American Prison

While crowding has been a persistent feature of the American prison since its invention in the nineteenth century, the last decade of crisis has brought more outspoken media investigations of prison conditions, higher levels of political and managerial turmoil, and a judiciary increasingly willing to bring the conditions of confinement under the scope of Eighth Amendment review. With the added incentive of severe budget constraints, liberals and conservatives alike now question whether this is any way to do business. Although crowding cannot be defined by quantitative measures alone, many institutions have far exceeded their limits of density according to minimum standards promulgated by the corrections profession. Some fall far below any reasonable standard of human decency. The results are costly, dangerous, and offensive to the public interest. Breaking the cycle of recurrent crisis requires considered efforts to address the decentralized, discretionary nature of sentence decision making and to link sentencing policies to the resources available to the corrections function. The demand to match policy with resources is simply a call for more rational policymaking. To ask for less is to allow the future of corrections to resemble its troubled past.

Los «Administrative Law Judges» norteamericanos: imparcialidad administrativa y control judicial

2015 ◽  
pp. 129-162
Author(s):  
Francisco VELASCO CABALLERO
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Judicial Intervention ◽  
Administrative Agencies ◽  
Administrative Employees ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Open Issues

LABURPENA: Objektibotasuna eta Administrazioa Legeari lotuta izatea Zuzenbide Publiko Konparatuan beti irekita dauden gaiak dira. Helburu hori lortzeko, estatu bakoitzak hainbat tresna juridiko izaten ditu. Espainian, objektibotasunaren eta legezkotasunaren bermea epaileen esku utzi da, funtsean. Beste herrialde batzuek tresna administratiboak dituzte, helburu berberak lortzeko esku-hartze judizialaren beharrik gabe. Horrelakoak dira Ipar Amerikako ≪Administrative Law Judges≫ deituak. Administrazio-enplegatu independenteak dira (independentziazko estatutu ia judiziala dutenak), eta funtzio hau dute: aurkakotasun-prozedura administratiboetan interesdunei entzutea eta dagokion gaian erabaki objektibo bat proposatzea. Administrazio-agentzietako zuzendaritza-kargudunen aldean enplegatu publiko horiek duten independentziari esker, objektibotasuna eta legezkotasuna berma daiteke, esku-hartze judizialaren beharrik gabe. RESUMEN: La objetividad y la vinculacion de la Administracion a la ley son cuestiones permanentes abiertas en el Derecho publico comparado. Diversos son los instrumentos juridicos con las que, en cada Estado, se pretende alcanzar esos objetivos. En Espana, la garantia de objetividad y de legalidad se ha depositado, fundamentalmente, en los jueces. Otros paises disponen de instrumentos administrativos que, sin necesidad de intervencion judicial, pretenden alcanzar los mismos objetivos. Este es el caso de los llamados ≪Administrative Law Judges≫ del Derecho norteamericano. Son empleados administrativos independientes (con estatuto cuasi judicial de independencia) cuya funcion es oir a los interesados en los procedimientos administrativos contradictorios y proponer una decision objetiva en el correspondiente asunto. La independencia de la que disponen estos empleados publicos, respecto de los cargos directivos de las correspondientes agencias administrativas, permite asegurar la objetividad y legalidad sin necesidad de intervencion judicial. ABSTRACT : Objectivity and legality of the Public Administration are open issues in comparative law. Various are the legal instruments by means of which each nation intends to achieve those objectives. In Spain, the guarantees of objectivity and legality traditionally rely on the judicial branch of power. Other countries have displayed distinctive administrative instruments, different to judicial intervention, to achieve the same objectives. This is the case of the so-called ≪Administrative Law Judges≫ of US law. They are independent administrative employees holding quasi-judicial independent. Their task consists of conducting the hearings in contradictory administrative procedures and proposing objective decisions to the directors of the relevant administrative agencies.

Democratic Rationales for Pre-Strike Ballots

2020 ◽  
pp. 189-213
Author(s):  
Breen Creighton ◽  
Catrina Denvir ◽  
Richard Johnstone ◽  
Shae McCrystal ◽  
Alice Orchiston
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Central Issue ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
The Public ◽  
Industrial Action ◽  
Democratic Rights

Chapter 7 interrogates the central issue in the book—the extent to which pre-strike ballot requirements give effect to the democratic rights of individual workers and the public interest in ensuring that the exercise of strike action is based on democratic decision-making. It argues that pre-strike ballot requirements are imposed on trade unions in a very different context when compared with other forms of political or industrial contests. The chapter analyses unions’ democratic processes in three interrelated, but different, key decisions in the process to take strike action under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth): (i) the decision to apply for an order for a pre-strike ballot to be held; (ii) the decision to approve proposed industrial action in a pre-strike ballot; and (iii) the decision to take approved industrial action after such action has been approved in a pre-strike ballot. Each of these decisions occurs within the context of the legal and industrial relations framework, and the democratic processes involved are inevitably shaped by those frameworks. The evidence presented in this chapter suggests that the first and third decisions are generally conducted in a manner that allows for participatory democratic processes. However, when union members vote in a pre-strike ballot, there is little evidence of the kinds of practices that typically characterize a participatory democratic model. Instead, union engagement with members is focused on educating them about the legal requirements and the consequences of abstention or a no vote in associated bargaining, rather than on the arguments for and against the proposed industrial action.

Conclusion: SDO Decision-making and the Public Interest

2020 ◽  
pp. 210-237
Author(s):  
Alison Harcourt ◽  
George Christou ◽  
Seamus Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
International Level ◽  
Multiple Streams ◽  
Policy Entrepreneurship ◽  
Historical Representation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Decision Making Processes

The conclusion situates the book’s findings in academic debates on democracy and the Internet, global self-regulation, and civil society, and international decision-making processes in unstructured environments. It assesses whether current standards-developing organization (SDO) decision-making is able to bridge historical representation gaps and deficiencies. A nuanced pattern is emerging with increasing inclusion of a wider number of actors within SDO fora. The first part of the chapter returns to the Multiple Streams (MS) framework applied to the case studies on a comparative basis. It identifies key processes under which SDO rules of interaction are established at the international level and explains which interests have come to the fore within decision-making highlighting the occurrence of policy entrepreneurship, forum shopping, and coupling. The final part explores additional frameworks for SDO regulation where spaces for public interest consideration might occur in the future. These are opportunities for inserting public interest considerations into international and national Acts, certification programmes, and the move towards open source solutions for Internet management. The book concludes that, although the literature is expansive on the interaction of corporate sector actors within SDOs, the study of other actors, such as digital rights groups, civil society, academics, policy entrepreneurs and the technical community as a whole, has been underdressed in the literature on international self-regulatory fora to date. In this respect, the book raises important questions of representation of the public interest at the international level by having addressed the actions of actors within SDO fora who promote public interest goals.

‘This Happens All the Time’: Organizations, Rationalization and Ethical Dilemmas in Engineering

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 985-1003
Author(s):  
Tracey L Adams
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Ethical Standards ◽  
Professional Misconduct ◽  
Ample Evidence ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Impact

Given their positions of public trust, regulated professions are legally required to uphold ethical standards, and ensure that professional practice protects the public. Nonetheless, there is ample evidence that professionals do not always behave ethically. One proposed solution is greater organizational surveillance; however, research from a neo-Weberian perspective encourages scepticism about such arguments. Organizations may not only fail to stop professionals from violating ethical codes, but rationalizing organizations might actively encourage such violations in the name of efficiency. This article explores the impact of organizations and rationalization on professional misconduct through a mixed-methods study of professional engineers in Ontario, Canada. Findings suggest engineers are impacted by rationalization, and that those with less decision-making authority experience pressures discouraging practice in the public interest.

scholarly journals Application of Environmental Conflict Resolution to Public Interest Issues in Water Disputes

2011 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Jeffrey QC ◽  
Donna Craig
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Environmental Conflict ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Conflict Resolution ◽  
Political Economic

This article examines the role of environmental conflict resolution (ECR) in the public interest issues of water disputes. The article endeavours to  illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of a range of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and negotiation approaches in the context of decision-making. Although many embrace ECR as the cheaper and more effective alternative to more formalistic and entrenched judicial processes before courts of law and quasi-judicial tribunals, the authors argue that there is an urgent need for a more critical, contextual and issue-oriented approach. In particular, the article highlights the significant difficulties associated with representing the full range of stakeholders who should be involved in an ADR process, and the lack of transparency and procedural safeguards associated with ADR in complex public interest disputes. The strength of ADR in smaller project-specific disputes involving a very limited number of stakeholders is well understood. The authors argue that ADR may have a significant role in scoping the issues and associated research as well as facilitating agreement on procedural aspects of large, complex public interest water disputes. However, ADR has severe limitations as a decision-making process. For example, water conflicts necessarily involve the concept of sustainability that in turn touches on a complex maze of social, political, economic and ecological values. The probability of reaching a mediated settlement in such a context is severely curtailed. A preferable approach may be one that is entirely transparent, capable of being both monitored and enforced, and is binding on all stakeholders whether or not they are parties to the mediation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document