ENSURING LEGAL CERTAINTY AND LEGALITY IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES: LEGAL FOUNDATIONS FOR ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS AND THE LIMITS OF THEIR DETERMINATION
Keywords:
legal certainty; legality; administrative procedure; administrative discretion; discretionary power; requirements imposed on individuals; administrative regulation; corruption risk; administrative transparency; predictability; public services; accreditation; prevention of administrative offenses; international experience; rule of law.Abstract
This article examines the significance of the principles of legal certainty and legality in administrative procedures as applied to the establishment of requirements imposed on individuals. The scientific problem addressed in the study lies in the fact that, in practice, administrative bodies and officials sometimes demand additional documents, information, or actions that are not provided for by legislation or the relevant administrative regulations. Such practices may restrict a person's rights and legitimate interests, lead to an unjustified expansion of administrative discretion, and increase the risk of corruption. The purpose of the study is to provide a theoretical and comparative-legal substantiation of the essence and content of the principle of legal certainty, the legal limits of requirements imposed on individuals, and the nature of the relationship between violations of these limits and corruption risks.
The study includes a comparative analysis of the current legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan — in particular, the provisions of the Law "On Administrative Procedures" — as well as the administrative-legal practice of such countries as Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Estonia, Singapore, the Republic of Korea, and Kazakhstan, together with the provisions of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the recommendations of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). As a result of the study, a direct logical relationship is scientifically substantiated between the vagueness of requirements, the expansion of administrative discretion, and the increase in corruption risks. Concrete scientific and practical proposals are also developed, including the establishment of a closed (exhaustive) list of documents and information required under administrative regulations, and the statutory restriction of the authority to impose additional requirements.
References
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг "Маъмурий тартиб-таомиллар тўғрисида"ги Қонуни // Ўзбекистон Республикаси қонун ҳужжатлари маълумотлар миллий базаси, lex.uz.
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг Конституцияси. — Тошкент, 1992-йил 8-декабрь, lex.uz.
Bingham T. The Rule of Law. — London: Allen Lane, 2010.
United Nations Convention against Corruption (БМТнинг Коррупцияга қарши конвенцияси), 2003-йил 31-октябрда қабул қилинган, Ўзбекистон Республикаси томонидан ратификация қилинган.
OECD. Recommendation of the Council on Regulatory Policy and Governance. — Paris: OECD Publishing, 2012.
OECD. Recommendation of the Council on Public Integrity. — Paris: OECD Publishing, 2017.
Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz (VwVfG) Германия Федератив Республикасининг Маъмурий процедура тўғрисидаги қонуни, 1976-йил таҳрири (кейинги ўзгартиришлар билан).
Code des relations entre le public et l'administration - Франция Республикасининг Жамоатчилик ва маъмурият ўртасидаги муносабатлар кодекси, 2016-йилдан кучга кирган.
Wade H.W.R., Forsyth C. Administrative Law. — Oxford: Oxford University Press, 11th ed., 2014.
Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817 - Канада Олий судининг қарори
Republic of Estonia Public Information Act (Avaliku teabe seadus) hamda e-Estonia “once-only” тамойили бўйича расмий ҳужжатлар, e-estonia.com
Singapore Government. GoBusiness Licensing ва бошқа электрон давлат хизматлари платформалари бўйича расмий маълумотлар gobusiness.gov.sg.
