Legal Criteria for the Exercise of Administrative Discretion

Abstract

          A significant issue arose when administrative authorities were subject to lawsuits resulting from unlawful actions that infringed upon the rights of citizens. This was particularly evident in cases involving the improper exercise of discretionary power, as existing legal provisions lacked clear rules governing such discretion. Therefore, the development of legal criteria to serve as guiding principles for administrative discretion was of vital importance. This research employed a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative methodologies. It involved documentary research and the collection of conceptual frameworks through in-depth interviews with both practitioners of administrative discretion and judicial authorities. The research is not merely a review of legal doctrines but an analytical examination of these principles through empirical perspectives drawn from actual practitioners and judicial authorities, providing insights into how theoretical legal principles are applied in actual administrative practices. The collected data were grouped, analysed, and validated for content accuracy across each interview question, and the results revealed a content validity index ranging from 0.67 to 1.00. The findings indicate that the exercise of administrative discretion must adhere to essential principles: discretion must not contravene the law; it may only be exercised when explicitly authorized by law; and its exercise must not exceed or deviate from the scope defined by the relevant legal provisions. Moreover, the application of discretion must ensure consistency between the facts and the applicable legal rules, and it must strike a balance between public interest and private interest. If these research findings are established as formal criteria for the exercise of administrative discretion, they may serve as a safeguard to ensure that administrative authorities exercise their discretionary power in accordance with the law.