14. Challenging government action

This article critically analyzes the ethical and legal implications of adopting predictive analytics by the French administrative justice system. It raises a key question: Is it wise to integrate artificial intelligence into the administrative justice system, considering its potential benefits, despite the associated risks, ethical dilemmas, and legal challenges? The research employs a method based on an extensive literature review, a qualitative analysis of the adoption by the French administrative justice of predictive analytics tools, and a critical evaluation of the benefits and issues these tools bring. The study finds that AI can make the administrative justice system more efficient, reduce backlogs, and enhance the consistency and predictability of judicial decisions. However, the study also identifies important risks and serious ethical and legal issues associated with integrating AI tools into the justice system. Especially, AI utilization can lead to the dehumanization of justice and poses real risks to the independence and impartiality of justice. While AI can offer significant benefits to all the stakeholders of the administrative justice system, its integration must be approached with caution. A progressive and responsible approach to AI adoption is necessary to avoid compromising judicial integrity and upholding fundamental justice values.

The use of artificial intelligence in administrative justice has been widely discussed in Iran. The challenges and problems of designing a scheduling system in provincial offices and enforcement branches and organizing the petition writing unit of the Administrative Court of Justice are among the issues that increase the need for artificial intelligence, and expert solutions must be provided. In addition to providing new opportunities to improve efficiency and accuracy, artificial intelligence brings numerous legal and ethical challenges. The present study aims to investigate and analyze the legal and ethical challenges of using artificial intelligence in the administrative justice system. The most important challenges were carefully examined in light of previous studies, and solutions were proposed as far as possible. Addressing these challenges requires comprehensive and multifaceted approaches, including developing legal and ethical frameworks, increasing system transparency, and maintaining human oversight. The present study emphasizes the use of artificial intelligence in administrative justice and suggests that artificial intelligence be used as a predictive algorithm in the Administrative Justice Court.

In 2016, the French Parliament introduced a new chapter on mediation in the Code of Administrative Justice. To succeed, this reform needs to reverse repeated failures in this field. In view of the significant challenge of embedding administrative mediation in the French administrative justice system, the reform and its implementation were informed by empirical findings arising from a mediation pilot set up by the administrative court of Grenoble in Spring 2013. An empirical study of the pilot and of the experience of rolling out administrative mediation in France forms the core of this article and the context in which to revisit foundational questions about mediation and administrative justice. I argue that mediation is not illsuited to administrative law disputes, but that to be integrated in a system of administrative justice, mediation requires the negotiation of a dedicated environment triggering in turn the emergence of a pluralist administrative justice system.

Since its emergence as a nation-state, Bangladesh has been trying hard to reshape its administrative actions to meet citizens’ needs, maintain social order and attain the goals of human society. Now, public administration is to play a pivotal role, exercising a huge bulk of power and actions related to the aspect of individual’s life. It is today not concerned with only pure administrative functions, it occasionally also discharges a large volume of quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial functions. Consequently, there are numerous occasion of failure of fair acts and decisions that arbitrarily affects the citizen. In this sphere, development in the administrative justice system is desirable. Following the qualitative method through the textual analysis of laws and cases, to explore a multitude of principles for regulating the functions of the administrative bodies, this study critically reviews the mechanism of judicial control of administrative action in Bangladesh and seeks to find out the problems and prospects of judicial review as the major means for controlling administrative action towards the establishment of administrative justice in Bangladesh.

This article critically reviews recent developments in the administrative justice system; in particular, it considers three key themes: improving initial decisions; administrative review; and the future of tribunals. In each of these areas, some aspects of administrative justice work well, but austerity has presented acute challenges in ensuring the fair and just treatment of people through restrictions upon legal aid; the withdrawal of some appeal rights; and the expansion of administrative review. Consequently, the system is moving away from a ‘legal’ model of administrative justice to the ‘bureaucratic rationality’ model, which focuses upon accurate and efficient implementation. However, the reality does not correspond with the goals of the model. Rather than accurate and efficient implementation of policy, what we find is poor decision-making made by junior officials with insufficient quality controls. Digitising tribunals may have potential benefits in terms of increased accessibility. Nonetheless, the prospects for administrative justice are weak.

The paper examines the roles of law and administration of justice in enhancing national security in Nigeria. Insecurity appears to be the greatest challenge threatening the integrity of the country. There is Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East, militancy and kidnapping for ransom are very rampant in virtually all parts of the country and Herdsmen/farmers clashes which originally began in the Middle Belt areas, is now a phenomenon in the whole territorial space, and there is rising incidence of armed robbery. Presently, the whole country is enveloped in an atmosphere of insecurity and this for a serious concern. Specifically, the paper examines the place of law in the scheme of national security and evaluates the existing national law and policy on crimes that continue to threaten the security of the nation of law in promoting national security and the administration of justice in Nigeria.The study recommends that The actors in the administration of justice system, the judges should imbibe, in particular, progressive legal ideology that emphasizes social justice; they should in specific clear cases avoid strict application of unjust legal rules which they consider oppressive or unfair.

The purpose of the work is to study the principles of legality and justice in the practice of administrative proceedings of the Republic of Kazakhstan. For this, methods such as system and comparative analysis, logical analysis, deduction, induction, and formal-legal methods were used. During the implementation of the study, the significance, and role of legal principles in administrative justice in the Republic of Kazakhstan were investigated. After analysing the model of the transition of the countries of the former USSR to the system of administrative justice and the specifics of its implementation in Kazakhstan, it was concluded that the principles of legality and justice are legally fixed in the Administrative Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. This article analyses the studies of both Kazakhstani and foreign scientists concerning the application of laws and principles in administrative proceedings. In addition, some aspects of improving the system of administrative justice in the context of legislative regulation of the application of legal principles are considered. The practical value of the results obtained is to provide recommendations that will have an impact on the activities of the administrative justice system of Kazakhstan and will allow it to be implemented more efficiently.

The development of procedural law and the overall framework of the administration of justice after 1948 took in many respects previously unknown forms. First of all, the convergence of civil and criminal procedural law in some aspects (e.g. the role of prosecutors) is a characteristic feature of the period, whereby the elements of non-contentious proceedings were extended even to adversarial proceedings, as a result of which the principle of searching for material (objective) truth became a characteristic principle for both civil and criminal proceedings. The deformations introduced after 1948 included also the abandonment of a separate labor justice system and administrative justice system (from 1952) in Czechoslovakia, when, on the one hand, the resolution of labor law disputes was entrusted to autonomous authorities at workplaces, and on the other hand, the Supreme Administrative Court was abolished in 1952 as allegedly conflicting with the sovereignty of the people, who were deemed to rule through the executive bodies and offices. Paradoxically, the arbitration, which is traditionally based on extra-judicial dispute resolution, was significantly weakened – it was only allowed for international business relations. Instead, a special, state-controlled arbitration was created for national business and economic relations – so called state arbitration, or economic arbitration, as a special system parallel to the judiciary. Thus, all in all, the judicial power and its competences were significantly curtailed in the observed period – in favor of mechanisms controlled by the executive and the Communist Party. These deformations became even stronger after 1960, when socialism was allegedly reached in Czechoslovakia, according to the wording of the 1960 Constitution. Further development brought another simplification of procedural law, whereas the administration of justice was to a yet even greater extent entrusted to extra-judicial bodies.

Administrative Law: A Very Short Introduction explores how administrative law shapes decision making across the public sector, from immigration and social welfare to taxation and public health. It highlights the mechanisms available to challenge decisions, including ombudsman complaints, tribunal appeals, and judicial review. This VSI examines core elements such as internal review, freedom of information, public inquiries, and anti-corruption measures. Drawing on examples from major common law jurisdictions—including the UK, Australia, Canada, the USA, India, and Hong Kong—it reveals both shared foundations and jurisdictional variations. Thomson offers a concise, comparative overview that illuminates the essential role of administrative law in modern governance.

There has been little dialogue or contact between the literatures on administrative justice and judicial review. This chapter argues that the two share common concerns and would benefit from closer engagement. Using a scheme based on Mary Douglas’s grid-group cultural theory, it suggests that judicial review can and does discharge a variety of tasks that are fundamentally concerned with administrative justice. A closer focus on these tasks, and on the contribution they make to infusing justice into the functioning of administrative government, has the potential to productively reframe the concerns of judicial review scholarship and overcome the current ‘clash of styles’ that currently characterises theoretical work in public law.

The Italian administrative justice system is organized on a two-tier basis. The court of first instance is the Administrative Tribunal (TAR) and has mainly consultative functions and support the work of the national administration through advisory opinions. The second level court is the Council of State, whose sections III, IV, V, and VI are jurisdictional. The administered mediation is a procedure fulfilled by private or public bodies listed in a register created by the Ministry of Justice. The common rationale of the mediation procedure is to deflate the amount of controversies burdening the docket of civil judges. The European directive insists on the principles of due process, impartiality of the subject in charge, efficacy, transparency, quickness, equity, privacy, and money-saving. The Italian legal system no longer affords this mediation procedure. Mediation survives only in the voluntary version, even in case of controversies implying public administrations. Keywords: European directive; Italian administrative justice system; mediation procedure

Administrative Justice in Australian Administrative Law

In search of a role In Chapter 10, we considered complaints-handling by the administration, settling for a ‘bottom-up’ approach. This led us to focus on proportionate dispute resolution (PDR) and machinery, such as internal review, by which complaints can be settled before they ripen into disputes. In so doing, we diverged from the ‘top-down’ tradition of administrative law where tribunals are seen as court substitutes. We returned to the classic approach in Chapter 11, looking at the recent reorganisation of the tribunal service and its place in the administrative justice system. We saw how the oral and adversarial tradition of British justice was reflected in tribunal procedure and considered the importance attached to impartiality and independence, values now protected by ECHR Art. 6(1). We, however, argued that recent reshaping of the tribunal system left unanswered key questions about oral and adversarial proceedings and whether they are always the most appropriate vehicle for resolving disputes with the administration. Would we be better served by inquisitorial and investigatory procedure such as is used by the ombudsman? We looked briefly at ombudsman systems within the UK in Chapter 10, noting an unfortunate degree of fragmentation and considering their relationship with courts. Now we want to look more closely at the way in which ombudsmen work, focusing on the Parliamentary Commissioner (PCA), with whose office truly inquisitorial and investigatory procedure first reached our shores in 1967. An ‘ombudsman’ is literally a ‘complaints man’, a title suggesting a general grievance-handling function; alternatively, he may be described as a ‘mediator’ (the French title) because he aims at negotiated solutions.

Introduction to the English Legal System 2018–2019 has been fully updated to consider the latest developments in the English legal system. The focus is on transformation. The criminal (Chapter 5), the administrative (Chapter 6), the family (Chapter 7), and the civil and commercial (Chapter 8) justice systems are all engaged in a process of change designed to enable them to operate more efficiently; this will include major investment in the use of IT in the delivery of court and tribunal services. Developments in the ways in which the legal profession is regulated are also discussed (Chapter 9), and the results of enquiries designed to control the cost of litigating are considered (Chapter 10). Progress with Brexit is noted, although its final form and its impact on the English legal system are not yet known (Chapter 3). The book starts by introducing themes and structure, after which Part II looks at law society and authority and considers the purpose and functions of law. Part III examines the institutional framework and looks into the role of government, the criminal justice system, the administrative justice system, the family justice system, and the civil and commercial justice systems; Part IV describes the delivery and funding of legal services; and Part V offers a reflection on the process of transformation and the challenges it should address.

The paper aims to present the realisation of two procedural principles – the right to good administration and the right to legal remedy – regulated also in the Fundamental Law of Hungary, which entered into force on 1st January 2012. The right to legal remedy has been a constitutional principle since the change of regime (in 1989) and the right to good administration has been constitutionally named only by the Fundamental Law of Hungary. The actuality of the paper is the fact that in Hungary from the 1st of January 2018 completely new codes regulate the general public administrative procedures and the administrative justice. Based on these Acts, a new legal remedy system has been introduced regarding administrative decisions in which the judicial review procedures became – instead of the internal administrative appeal procedures – in most of the cases the firstly used legal remedy possibility regarding administrative decisions. After a short overview of the new legal remedy system which has been introduced regarding administrative decisions, the paper presents the constitutional basis of the right to good administration and the right to legal remedy. Finally, we analyse in detail the latest and most relevant decisions of the Constitutional Court of Hungary and some cases of the Curia of Hungary about the practice of the direct enforcement of the constitutional principles: the right to good administration and the right to legal remedy regarding administrative decisions.