首页> 外文学位 >Procedural Fairness and Citizen Control: Addressing the Legitimacy Deficit in the Canadian Administrative State
【24h】

Procedural Fairness and Citizen Control: Addressing the Legitimacy Deficit in the Canadian Administrative State

机译:程序公平与公民控制:解决加拿大行政州的合法性缺陷

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The Canadian administrative state has changed significantly since the first half of the twentieth century, but legal scholarship has paid scant attention to how such changes might affect the administrative state's legitimacy. This thesis argues that the traditional mechanisms for legitimating the increasingly complex and diffuse administrative state are no longer sufficient, particularly in the context of delegated law-making. It uses a republican model of legitimacy to argue for the necessity of citizen control over administrative decision-making.;It is incumbent on Canadian administrative law to help provide this citizen control. A concern with legitimacy is consistent with the first principles of administrative law and judicial review, and the doctrine of procedural fairness is well placed to further the participatory vision of legitimacy the thesis employs. Further, the history of procedural fairness shows that legitimacy of decision-making has always been a core concern of the doctrine. However, more recent developments, including a fixation on adjudicative decision-making and the refusal to apply procedural fairness to delegated law-making, mean that Canadian administrative law does not sufficiently facilitate citizen control. This is inconsistent with both the internal values of Canadian administrative law and the civic republican vision of legitimacy. There is, however, a separate line of bylaws jurisprudence which more generously extends procedural fairness to delegated law-making. The thesis argues this bylaws jurisprudence is a good starting point to build from.;The experience of comparative administrative law makes it even clearer that Canadian administrative law is able to do this legitimating work. The United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia all provide broader participation rights in the law-making sphere with weaker tools than are available in Canada. Further, the domestic aboriginal law duty to consult and accommodate make it clear that the Canadian courts are already comfortable imposing broadly applicable procedural rights.;Building from this comparative and cognate jurisprudence and the bylaws cases mentioned above, the thesis argues that it is possible with only limited substantive changes to the law to develop the doctrine of procedural fairness to provide broad participatory rights in the delegated law-making sphere, thereby securing the legitimacy of the administrative state.
机译:自20世纪上半叶以来,加拿大行政州发生了显着变化,但是法律学者很少关注这种变化可能如何影响行政州的合法性。本文认为,使日益复杂和分散的行政国家合法化的传统机制已不再足够,特别是在授权立法的背景下。它使用共和党的合法性模型来论证公民对行政决策的控制的必要性。加拿大行政法有责任提供这种公民控制。对合法性的关注与行政法和司法审查的第一原则相一致,并且程序公正原则在促进论文所采用的合法性参与性视野方面处于有利地位。此外,程序公平的历史表明,决策的合法性一直是该学说的核心问题。但是,最近的事态发展,包括对审判决策的关注,以及拒绝将程序公正性应用于授权立法,意味着加拿大行政法不足以促进公民控制。这既不符合加拿大行政法的内部价值观,也不符合公民共和制对合法性的看法。但是,有一条单独的章程法学体系,可以更广泛地将程序公正性扩展到授权立法。论文认为,该章程的法理学是建立的一个良好的起点。比较行政法的经验更加清楚了加拿大行政法能够做到这一合法性工作。英国,新西兰和澳大利亚都在立法领域提供了比加拿大更弱的参与权。此外,国内原住民法律的咨询和调解责任明确表明,加拿大法院已经很容易施加广泛适用的程序性权利。基于这种比较性和同类性法理学以及上述章程案例,本文认为,只有对法律进行有限的实质性修改,以发展程序公正原则,以在授权的立法领域提供广泛的参与权,从而确保行政国家的合法性。

著录项

  • 作者

    Clark, Edward.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Toronto (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 University of Toronto (Canada).;
  • 学科 Law.
  • 学位 S.J.D.
  • 年度 2017
  • 页码 248 p.
  • 总页数 248
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:38:27

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号