Comparative Administrative Law
Show Less

Comparative Administrative Law

Edited by Susan Rose-Ackerman and Peter L. Lindseth

This research handbook is a comprehensive overview of the field of comparative administrative law. The specially commissioned chapters in this landmark volume represent a broad, multi-method approach combining perspectives from history and social science with more strictly legal analyses. Comparisons of the United States, continental Europe, and the British Commonwealth are complemented by contributions that focus on Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The work aims to stimulate comparative research on public law, reaching across countries and scholarly disciplines.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 27: Judicial Deference to Legislative Delegation and Administrative Discretion in New Democracies: Recent Evidence from Poland, Taiwan, and South Africa

Cheng-Yi Huang


Cheng-Yi Huang* The tension between judicial control, legislative delegation, and administrative discretion is an ever-contested issue in administrative law. Many administrative law doctrines address this question, either directly or implicitly, especially in the area of rulemaking. Whether approached from the perspective of common law ultra vires doctrine or from that of the continental Rechtsstaat, courts must ensure that an agency, in exercising its discretion, does not go beyond the scope of legislative delegation. Constitutional limits on delegation, in turn, go to the ultimately democratic nature of the system: only where the administrative body can claim to exercise authority flowing from a constitutional delegation of power from the legislature does that administrative body enjoy ultimate democratic legitimacy. However, as shown in the experience of Germany in interwar Europe in the twentieth century, overbroad delegations can pose a danger for democracy. The flood of vague enabling laws of the 1920s ultimately culminated in the Nazi’s Ermächtigungsgesetz, or Enabling Act, of March 24, 1933, providing the legal foundation, if not the political and cultural cause, for the National-Socialist dictatorship (Lindseth 2004: 1341–71). As a consequence, the post-World War II German Constitution clearly required the legislature to specify the ‘content, purpose, and extent’ (Inhalt, Zweck und Ausmaß) of the legislative authorization in the statutes (Currie 1995: 126), as a means of preventing future legislative abdications.1 This doctrine has become a constitutional paradigm for new democracies in dealing with the dilemma of legislative delegation and administrative rulemaking. New democracies, the subject of this...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.