Administrative law

Administrative law constitutes a principal branch of public law concerned with regulating the activities, powers, and procedures of governmental administrative agencies. It provides the legal framework within which executive authorities operate, ensuring their actions remain lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair. As a discipline, it encompasses rule-making, adjudication, and the enforcement of regulatory standards, and it plays a critical role in mediating the relationship between the state and individuals across a wide spectrum of social, economic, and political domains.

Background and Conceptual Foundations

Administrative law emerged in response to the expansion of governmental functions, particularly during the twentieth century when states worldwide established specialised agencies to manage increasingly complex policy areas. These agencies gained authority in fields such as international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration, and transport. The rapid growth of regulatory bodies required an accompanying legal system to ensure that administrative powers were exercised in a controlled and accountable manner.
Although administrative law varies across legal traditions, it typically aims to uphold several core principles, including legality, impartiality, transparency, reasonableness, and efficiency in governmental action. In public law systems grounded in the rule of law, administrative authorities must act only within the scope of powers granted by legislation, and individuals affected by administrative decisions must have access to fair procedures and judicial review.
In many civil law jurisdictions, administrative law has been increasingly shaped by supranational legal orders. International institutions, cross-border regulatory systems, and global treaties have influenced national approaches, particularly in areas such as public procurement, environmental management, and education. As a result, administrative law now extends beyond national boundaries, contributing to the formation of an emerging international administrative framework.

Administrative Law in Civil Law Jurisdictions

Civil law countries typically distinguish sharply between private and public law, leading to the establishment of specialised administrative courts. These courts apply procedural rules specifically designed for administrative disputes, which differ from those governing private law claims such as contract or tort.
Such systems aim to protect citizens from arbitrary or abusive exercises of public power by providing dedicated mechanisms to challenge administrative decisions. The structure and scope of administrative adjudication vary across states, as illustrated by several examples.

Brazil

In Brazil, administrative disputes are heard by different judicial bodies depending on the nature of the case. Federal Courts hear matters involving the Federal Union, whereas State Courts—specifically the Public Treasury divisions—handle cases involving state authorities. A significant constitutional reform in 1998 introduced regulatory agencies into the executive branch, modernising oversight of sectors such as telecommunications, health surveillance, and energy.
Brazilian administrative law is strongly influenced by constitutional principles articulated in Article 37 of the 1988 Federal Constitution. These principles include:

• Legality, requiring administrative action to conform strictly to the law.
• Impersonality, ensuring neutrality in public administration.
• Publicity, mandating transparency of official acts.
• Morality, imposing ethical standards on administrative conduct.
• Efficiency, promoting effective and timely performance of administrative functions.

These principles guide judicial review and underpin the nation’s administrative jurisprudence.

Chile

Chile’s administrative structure is centred upon the President, who exercises executive authority with the support of ministries and ministerial-level officials. Each ministry includes one or more undersecretaries responsible for directing public services and managing public needs.
Chile does not maintain a single centralised administrative court. Instead, challenges to administrative actions are allocated across various specialised courts and procedures. This fragmented system reflects the diversity of governmental functions and ensures that disputes are reviewed by bodies with relevant expertise.

China

Before the economic reforms of the late twentieth century, China possessed limited administrative legal structures. The reform era initiated under Deng Xiaoping marked the beginning of a comprehensive administrative law system designed to curb abuse of power, regulate bureaucratic behaviour, and introduce legal accountability within the state apparatus.
Key developments in Chinese administrative law include:

• Administrative Litigation Law (1989) – established judicial avenues for citizens to contest government actions.
• Administrative Reconsideration and Supervision Regulations (1990) – created internal mechanisms to oversee administrative conduct.
• State Civil Servant Provisional Regulations (1993) – introduced merit-based recruitment, examinations, appraisals, and promotion systems for officials.
• State Compensation Law (1994) – provided remedies for harm caused by administrative actions.
• Administrative Penalties Law (1996) – set limits and procedures for imposing administrative sanctions.
• Administrative Compulsory Law (2012) – regulated the use of compulsory measures by authorities.

China continues to develop its administrative procedure laws, reflecting efforts to strengthen rule-based governance and public accountability.

France

France represents one of the most influential civil law models, characterised by a strong institutional distinction between judicial and administrative jurisdictions. Administrative matters fall under the authority of dedicated administrative courts, with the Council of State (Conseil d’État) acting as the supreme administrative court.
The administrative court system includes:

• Tribunaux administratifs – first-instance administrative courts.
• Cours administratives d’appel – appellate administrative courts.
• Specialised bodies, such as the court for asylum matters and various disciplinary tribunals.

French administrative law, known as droit administratif, is notable for its rich jurisprudence and doctrinal development. Over time, administrative courts have established key principles such as:

• Right to defence (droit à la défense).
• Right to challenge administrative acts (droit au recours).
• Equality before public services and public employment.
• Freedom of association and economic freedoms.
• Right to legal certainty (sécurité juridique).

France’s model has served as a foundation for administrative law in many other countries, particularly within Europe and the Mediterranean region.

Germany

German administrative law regulates the extensive relationships between public authorities and individuals, distinguishing itself from constitutional law while operating under its overarching principles. Modern German administrative law places strong emphasis on protecting individual rights and ensuring thorough judicial scrutiny of administrative discretion.
Foundational principles in the German system include:

• Lawfulness of administrative action, requiring authorities to act only within legislatively defined powers.
• The parliamentary reserve principle, under which any measure restricting fundamental rights must have statutory authorisation.
• Legal certainty and non-retroactivity, ensuring stability and predictability of administrative decisions.
• Proportionality, mandating that administrative measures must be suitable, necessary, and appropriate.

Administrative jurisdiction in Germany is comprehensive, and courts have final authority in interpreting administrative law. Most administrative responsibilities are carried out by federal entities, reflecting the federal structure of the German state.

Scope, Functions, and Global Developments

Administrative law today serves as a crucial mechanism for ensuring that public administration operates within constitutional and legal boundaries. Its functions include:

• Regulating rule-making by executive agencies.
• Ensuring fair administrative procedures, including the right to be heard and reasoned decision-making.
• Providing judicial review, allowing courts to examine the legality and fairness of administrative action.
• Maintaining accountability in public service delivery.
• Promoting efficiency and ethical standards within governmental operations.