Available in Russian
Authors: Aleksei Dolzhikov, Anna Vasilyeva
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2024-2-19-44
Keywords: constitutional right to reasonable administrative action; substantive judicial review; reason-giving; expediency; de novo judicial review; scientific validity; evidence in administrative proceedings; questions of fact
The constitutionalization of administrative law has different manifestations. The fundamental law of every country influences the structure and functions of executive authorities. Most often, constitutions affect public administration by establishing fundamental principles such as democracy, separation of powers, and rule of law. In some cases, such abstract constitutional provisions remain only as a beautiful ideal without really limiting the arbitrariness of administration. In other cases, on the contrary, they predetermine the scope and intensity of judicial review of administrative action. One example is reference to the constitutional principle of separation of powers, which allows courts to justify deference in reviewing governmental actions. Some jurisdictions are declaring “new” fundamental rights in the field of public governance. Among them are the right to just administrative actions and the right to administrative justice. Despite the difference in wording, such constitutional provisions include the right to reasoned administration. This article examines the reason-giving principle in administrative law. The authors’ main argument addresses the possibility of a broader interpretation of the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs in Russia. It is argued that the scope of this fundamental right covers the requirement of reasoned administrative actions. In support of the main thesis, a comparative legal method is used, based on which the paper examines the issue of constitutionalizing the right to reasoned administration. In the next part, an attempt is made to systematically analyze the normative framework of the reasoned administration requirement in Russian legislation. This conceptual analysis is due to the lack of codification of administrative procedures in modern Russia. Finally, the development of the principle of reasoned administrative actions is shown using examples of Russian jurisprudence. Along with individual actions and decisions, the extension of the constitutional right to reasoned administration in relation to subordinate regulations is discussed.
About the authors: Aleksei Dolzhikov – Doctor of Sciences in Law, Associate Professor of the Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law, Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia; Anna Vasilyeva – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, LL.M. (University of Passau), Associate Professor of the Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law, Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Citation: Dolzhikov A., Vasilyeva A. (2024) Konstitutsionnoe pravo na motivirovannoe upravlenie [Constitutional right to reasoned administration]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.33, no.2, pp.19–44. (In Russian).
References
(2019) Regulyatornaya gil'otina [Regulatory guillotine]. Zakon, no.2, pp.20–36. (In Russian).
Della Cananea G. (2016) Due Process of Law Beyond the State: Requirements of Administrative Procedure, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chambliss E. (2019) Evidence-Based Lawyer Regulation. Washington University Law Review, vol.97, no.2, pp.297–350.
Corder H. (2020) A Right to Administrative Justice. “New” or Just Repackaging the Old? In: von Arnauld A., von der Decken K., Susi M. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights: Recognition, Novelty, Rhetoric, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.493–506.
Davis K.C. (1980) Facts in Lawmaking. Columbia Law Review, vol.80, no.5, pp.931–942.
Davydov K.V. (2020) Spetsial'nye printsipy administrativnykh protsedur [Special principles of administrative procedures]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N.I.Lobachevskogo, no.2, pp.125–133. (In Russian).
Davydov K.V. (2021) Trebovaniya k administrativnym aktam: rossiyskiy i zarubezhnyy opyt [Administrative acts requirements: Russian and foreign experience]. Zhurnal administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva, no.2, pp.22–28. (In Russian).
Dobrolyubova E.I., Yuzhakov V.N., Starostina A.N. (2021) Otsenka kachestva gosudarstvennogo upravleniya: obosnovannost', rezul'tativnost', effektivnost' [Assessing the quality of public administration: validity, effectiveness, efficiency], Moscow: Izdatel'skiy dom “Delo”. (In Russian).
Garner B.A. (ed.) (2009) Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th ed., St. Paul, MN: West.
Ivanov O. (1968) Zakonnost' i obosnovannost' sudebnogo resheniya [Legality and validity of court decisions]. Sovetskaya yustitsiya, no.3, pp.15–16. (In Russian).
Karimov D.A., Shadrin D.N., Pestikov I.V. (2018) (Ne)uchet sudom novykh dokazatel'stv pri otsenke administrativnykh aktov [(Non)consideration by the court of new evidence when assessing administrative acts]. Nalogoved, no.8, pp.43–58. (In Russian).
Kearney J.J. (1938) Problem of De Novo Judicial Review of Administrative Action. Notre Dame Lawyer, vol.14, no.3, pp.233–257.
Khabrieva T.Ya. (2019) (ed.) Konstitutsii gosudarstv Afriki i Okeanii: sbornik. Tom 3: Yuzhnaya Afrika [Constitutions of African and Pacific States. Vol.2: East Africa: a compendium], Moscow: Institut zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya pri Pravitel'stve Rossiyskoy Federatsii. (In Russian).
Khabrieva T.Ya. (2019) (ed.) Konstitutsii gosudarstv Afriki i Okeanii: sbornik. Tom 3: Yuzhnaya Afrika [Constitutions of African and Pacific States. Vol.3: South Africa: a compendium], Moscow: Institut zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya pri Pravitel'stve Rossiyskoy Federatsii. (In Russian).
Klaaren J., Penfold G. (2013) Just Administrative Action. In: Woolman St., Bishop M. (eds.) Constitutional Law of South Africa, 2nd ed., Cape Town: Juta Law, pp.63-1–63-128.
Knutov А.V., Plaksin S.М., Sinyatullin R.Kh., Chaplinskiy А.V. (2022) “Regulyatornaya gil'otina” v Rossii i ee kolichestvennye rezul'taty [Regulatory guillotine in Russia and its quantitative results]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no.2, pp.4–27. (In Russian).
Lopatinskiy I.V. (2023) O probleme nedopustimosti pereotsenki dokazatel'stv arbitrazhnymi kassatsionnymi sudami [Regarding the problem of inadmissibility of criteria for re-evaluating evidence by arbitration courts of cassation]. Vestnik arbitrazhnoy praktiki, no.4, pp.86–92. (In Russian).
Mańko R. (2014) Vyzhila li sotsialisticheskaya pravovaya traditsiya? Vzglyad iz Pol'shi [Survival of the socialist legal tradition? A Polish perspective]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava, no.2, pp.238–266. (In Russian).
Nikitin S.V. (2010) Sudebnyy kontrol' za normativnymi pravovymi aktami v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsesse: monografiya [Judicial control over normative legal acts in civil and arbitration proceedings: a monograph], Moscow: Rossiyskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet pravosudiya. (In Russian).
Plasket C. (2002) The Fundamental Right to Just Administrative Action: Judicial Review of Administrative Action in the Democratic South Africa: Ph.D. Thesis, Makhanda: Rhodes University. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003208 (accessed: 15.05.2024).
Plasket C., Khoza F. (2001) The Fundamental Right to Reasons for Administrative Action: Moletsane v The Premier of the Free State (1996) 17 ILJ 251 (O). Industrial Law Journal, vol.22. pp.52–53.
Reshetnikova I.V. (2015) Sravnitel'nyy analiz pravovogo regulirovaniya dokazyvaniya v protsessual'nom zakonodatel'stve [Comparative analysis of the legal regulation of evidence in procedural legislation]. In: Problemy realizatsii norm, reguliruyushchikh dokazyvanie i dokazatel'stva v grazhdanskom, arbitrazhnom i administrativnom sudoproizvodstve: sbornik statey po materialam Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii [Problems of implementing the norms regulating evidence in civil, arbitration and administrative proceedings: a collection of articles based on the materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference], Saint Petersburg: Petropolis, pp.273–279. (In Russian).
Rosenman N. (2007) A Rights-Based Approach to Judicial Review? The High Court in Griffith University v Tang and the Dangers of Dismissing Ultra Vires. The Australian Institute of Administrative Law Forum, no.54, pp.106–116.
Salishcheva N.G. (2011) Izbrannoe [Selected works], Moscow: Rossiyskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet pravosudiya. (In Russian).
Shcheglov V.N. (1958) Zakonnost' i obosnovannost' sudebnogo resheniya po grazhdansko-pravovomu sporu [Legality and reasonableness of a court decision in a civil case], Novosibirsk: Novosibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel'stvo. (In Russian).
Shechter J.A. (1988) De Novo Judicial Review of Administrative Agency Factual Determinations Implicating Constitutional Rights. Columbia Law Review, vol.88, no.7, pp.1483–1511.
Shugrina E.S. (2023) Otmena razresheniy na stroitel'stvo ili na vvod v ekspluatatsiyu: predely polnomochiy organov mestnogo samoupravleniya [Abolition of construction or commissioning permits: limits of powers of local self-government authorities]. Gradostroitel'noe pravo, no.1, pp.2–5. (In Russian).
Smola A.A. (2022) Raz'yasneniya VS RF o nadlezhashchey protsedure rassmotreniya del v antimonopol'nykh organakh i ikh primenenie sudami [Rulings of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the proper procedure for resolving cases in the antitrust authorities and their application by the courts]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa, no.2, pp.200–240. (In Russian).
Tumanov D.A. (2022) Dopustimo li vtorzhenie sudov v sferu kompetentsii inykh organov vlasti? [Is it permissible for the courts to intrude into the competence of other authorities?]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa, no.1, pp.248–263. (In Russian).
Tumanova L.V. (2019) Osobennosti dokazyvaniya po delam o normokontrole [Features of proof in cases of compliance assessment]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa, no.1, pp.223–237. (In Russian).
Umanskaya V.P. (2013) Pravovye osnovaniya prinyatiya pravovykh aktov federal'nykh organov ispolnitel'noy vlasti [Legal basis of legal acts of federal executive authorities]. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess, no.11, pp.55–57. (In Russian).
Vinnitskiy A.V., Kharinov I.N. (2022) Neraskrytyy potentsial sudebnogo normokontrolya v svete Zakona ob obyazatel'nykh trebovaniyakh [Challenging legal acts containing mandatory requirements in court]. Rossiyskoe pravo: obrazovanie, praktika, nauka, no.6, pp.82–94. (In Russian).
Voßkuhle A. (2015) Printsip sorazmernosti [The principle of proportionality]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.24, no.1, pp.159–163. (In Russian).
Yarkovoy S.V. (2017) Zakonnost' i obosnovannost' administrativnoy pravoprimenitel'noy deyatel'nosti [The legality and validity of administrative enforcement]. Sibirskoe yuridicheskoe obozrenie, no.1, pp.82–89. (In Russian).
Yudin A.V. (2013) Predely “nesvyazannosti” suda osnovaniyami i dovodami zayavlennykh trebovaniy po delam, voznikayushchim iz publichnykh pravootnosheniy v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsesse [Limits of “unrelation” of courts in the requirements and arguments at the cases arising out of public relations in civil and commercial (“arbitrazh”) proceedings]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa, no.5, pp.34–46. (In Russian).
Yuzhakov V.N., Talapina E.V., Dobrolyubova E.I., Tikhomirov Yu.A. (2020) Initsiativnyy proekt zakona ob obespechenii kachestva gosudarstvennogo upravleniya [Initiative draft law on ensuring the quality of public administration], Moscow: Izdatel'skiy dom “Delo”. (In Russian).
Yuzhakov V.N., Dobrolyubova Yu.A., Tikhomirov Yu.A., Starostina A.N. (2022) Kachestvo rossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo upravleniya: problemy i prioritety [Quality of Russian public administration: problems and priorities], Moscow: Izdatel'skiy dom “Delo”. (In Russian).