The Powers Of The Italian Anti-Corruption Authority In Public Procurement: New Tools To Pursue Good Administration? (original) (raw)
Related papers
In the last two decades, European Union (EU) administrative law has gone through a process of extraordinary development and consolidation. It first developed as a body of principles and rules aimed at governing, on the one hand, the action of the EU public powers (such as the action of the Commission in the fields of State aids and competition), on the other hand, the action of the national administrations operating as decentralized EU agencies (e.g. the action of national public administrations in the field of public procurement). Subsequently, it has gradually developed in such a way to apply to the several phenomena of organizational and procedural interconnections among national and EU authorities. As a matter of fact, the EU legal order has elaborated a great variety of mechanisms of integration and composition of organizations and activities, establishing in different policy areas “European common systems”, made up of national, European and mixed authorities jointly responsible for the administrative implementation of an increasing number of EU rules and policies.
Good Administration in EU Law and the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2009
The Code of Good Administrative Behaviour has passed fairly unnoticed in academic research on the principle of good administration. However, it is an important source to understand the meaning of this principle and concept in European administrative law, since it encompasses some of its dimensions that tend to be overlooked by the case law of the European Courts and also by European law scholars. Furthermore, contrary to what recent developments let believe-namely, the fact that the Commission refuses to put forth a proposal for a European regulation that would make the provisions of the Code binding-the Code remains relevant to map possible legal developments regarding good administration. The article explains the reasons and meaning of the link between the Code and Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, analyses the complexity and uncertainty of the concept "good administration", characterises its different legal and non-legal facets highlighting the interconnections between them. In addition, it demonstrates how these different layers are reflected in the Code, underlines the Code's links with previous EU law developments, its added legal value and the functions it currently performs, considering also the different paths through which further legal, binding developments could derive from the Code 1 .
Current Debates in European Administrative Law – Background and Perspectives
2016
CURRENT DEBATES IN EUROPEAN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – BACKGROUND AND PERSPECTIVES 1 A. The Current Situation and the Basis for Reform Debates 2 I. Delegation and Pluralisation of the Executive 4 II. Integrated Administration and Composite Procedures 6 III. Consequences 9 B. The Specific Procedural Issues Regarding Forms of Act and Action 10 C. Constitutionalisation of the EU Regulatory Model? 12 D. An EU Regulation of Administrative Procedures? 14 I. EU administrative procedure rules as lex generalis? 14 II. Scope of Application of EU Administrative Procedure Law in Case of Member State Implementation? 15 III. Procedural Rules for Different Forms of Act? 16 E. Where To From Here? 17
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2014
Well-designed rules of administrative procedure for implementation of EU law and policies will have beneficial effects both for effectiveness of implementation as well as for the realisation of general principles of EU law: A codification of EU administrative procedure law has the potential improve compliance with the rule of law and the principle of legality in the EU, to enhance legal certainty and further the principles of good administration, to simplify the diversity of procedures and make more transparent rights and obligations of individuals and administrations alike. This will not be without effect on increasing the legitimacy of exercise of public powers in the Union. In order to live up to this potential, EU administrative procedure law needs to overcome its fragmentation. So far, each sector-specific legislation, despite addressing common problems, differs with respect to the formulation of procedural provisions. One of the central challenges for regulating EU administrative procedures is finding solutions for the forms of intense procedural cooperation between national and European administrative actors through 'composite procedures' characterised by multi-jurisdictional input into decision-making. The multiplication of composite procedures across the policy fields of the EU, furthering de-central administration of a single legal space under the concept of subsidiarity, currently has the potential of diffusing responsibility and endangering the constitutionally guaranteed right to an effective remedy. The ReNEUAL draft model rules on administrative procedure have been developed and discussed together with lawyers from practice and academia and from all over Europe. They are designed to offer solutions of how to ensure modern, state of the art and tailor-made solutions to the challenges facing implementation of EU law and policies in today's realities of integrated administration.
ReNEUAL Model Rules on EU Administrative Procedure
2017
The ReNEUAL Model Rules follow an approach of 'innovative codification'. This involves a new law bringing together in one document existing principles, which are scattered across different laws and regulations and in the case-law of courts. If necessary, the innovative codification also modifies these existing principles and rules and it may add new ones as well. (11) Constitutional principles constitute decisive normative standards for the design of administrative procedures in the EU. The existence or non-existence of administrative procedural rules in the EU is not merely a 'technical' question, free of constitutional value choices. The realisation of constitutional principles has a considerable potential impact on substantive outcomes. Administrative procedures for the implementation of EU law and policies entail administrative action in all its phases. Rules on administrative procedures need to be designed to equally maximise the twin objectives of public law: to ensure that the instruments in question foster the effective discharge of public duties and, at the same time, that the rights of individuals are protected. (12) Constitutional values and principles are the central normative standards for judging the design of procedures for implementation of EU law. Those values and principles include the protection of the rule of law and its emanations in subprinciples such as legality, legal certainty, proportionality of public action and the protection of legitimate expectations. Those values and principles further include the concepts of a democratic Union on the basis of a transparent system requiring not only the definition and protection of rights of participation and access to information but also, under Article 9 TEU, equality of citizens in their access to Union administration. Prominently, Articles 1(2) and 10(3) TEU require that, in the Union, in line with the principles of openness and of subsidiarity, "decisions shall be taken as openly and closely as possible to the citizen". (13) Other individual rights and obligations underpinning the design of procedures arise from the principle of good administration as partially restated in Article 41 CFR. Good administration requires that decisions be taken pursuant to procedures which guarantee fairness, impartiality and timeliness. Good administration includes the right to be given reasons-a requirement also 2 Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty [2003] OJ L 1/1 last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 487/2009 of 25 May 2009 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of agreements and concerted practices in the air transport sector (Codified version) [2009] OJ L 148/1. 3
Towards a European Administrative Procedure Act
Review of European Administrative Law, 2009
Under the joint responsibility of the Member States to implement EU law, administrative law systems of the EU are converging and a common body of EU administrative law is emerging. Most debates on this process of EU administrative law integration have focused on differences and divergences between national systems vis-à-vis the EU system. The concept of administration at the level of the EU, however, is difficult to compare to that in use in most domestic systems in continental Europe. In this contribution, we bring the lens of the United States (U.S.) approach to the debate. The problems and challenges the EU administration faces do resemble those which confronted the federal administration in the U.S. more than 50 years ago. The article discusses some of the parallels between the U.S. and EU system and zooms in on the EU's 'problem zones': preparation of regulation -in particular the role of participation and the use of evidence therein -and the position of agencies. On the basis of experiences with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in controlling the U.S. administration and the federal agencies, the contribution then reflects on the desirability of a general EU Administrative Law Act, especially in view of the upcoming extension of judicial review of general rules the Lisbon Treaty will most likely bring. The conclusion is in short that the American APA offers food for European thought and that a lot could be gained with a European styled APA 'light version'.
Public Governance, Administration and Finances Law Review (PGAF LR) , 2023
Administrative regimes are no longer isolated phenomena: they are constantly confronted with international influences, which shape the internal structure and system of the states. The cooperation between the European Union and the Member States' administration is today a kind of convergence in principles. This is what the EU expects from the candidate countries and in the neighbourhood policy. The main question of the study is whether the content of the principles used by the EU is cognisable and consistent. The study covers two policy instruments: the SIGMA project, which is a joint EU-OECD collaboration, and the comparative legal activities of the ReNEUAL. These instruments testify two completely different attitudes: one does not explain the principle but holds it accountable, the other seeks the means to understand its content and the reasons for the differences in interpretations. Both programs have undergone internal development, but while SIGMA has moved away from its administrative procedural roots, ReNEUAL has confirmed it. The paper is another argument in favour of the need for administrative research using the tools of comparative law .