Judicial oversight of administrative authority in issuing its decisions

Abstract

 This research examines the administrative authority in issuing its decisions and the role of the judiciary in supervising this authority. The study revealed that such authority oscillates between restricted competence and discretionary competence. Although the administration enjoys discretionary power that enables it to choose the appropriate time and means to make decisions in pursuit of the public interest, this power is not absolute, as it must always adhere to the principle of legality in all elements of the administrative decision. The research also demonstrated that restricted competence obliges the administration to issue specific decisions whenever the legal conditions are met, making such decisions subject to judicial review, whether the authority is restricted or discretionary. Nevertheless, the administration retains a discretionary power to determine the appropriateness and proportionality between the subject matter and the cause of the administrative decision, as well as the timing and manner, of its intervention, without being subject to judicial review as long as it acts within the bounds of legality. However, the evolution of comparative judicial thought has. produced a new trend that allows the administrative judge to examine the appropriateness and proportionality between the decision and its cause, as seen in France through the theory of the “manifest error of assessment,” which grants the judiciary broader authority to review. discretionary power, even when the decision appears lawful, if it entails a clear or obvious error in the assessment between the cause and the subject of the administrative decision. In contrast, Egypt and Libya have adopted this approach to a limited extent, particularly in the fields of administrative policing and disciplinary. actions, based on the theory of excess (abuse) established by the Egyptian Council of State, in an effort to achieve a balance between administrative authority and the protection of individual rights and public freedoms.

Keywords: Administrative judiciary, discretionary and restricted authority, administrative decision, theory of excess, theory of apparent error.