让听证官发挥更大的作用:一个适度的建议

T. Calvani, J. Leahy
{"title":"让听证官发挥更大的作用:一个适度的建议","authors":"T. Calvani, J. Leahy","doi":"10.1093/JAENFO/JNX021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article proposes changes to the role of the EU hearing officer and looks, as a starting point, to the US administrative model, in particular the role of the Administrative Law Judge. It is argued that the US model makes better use of its hearing examiners to understand and probe contested points of fact or law. The article sets out a proposal for strengthening the function and responsibilities of the EU hearing officer to also include a review of substantive points of the case. The hearing officer’s substantive findings, in addition to reporting on procedure, would be included in a final public report. These relatively modest changes would provide comfort to the parties that some independent scrutiny of disputed facts had taken place whilst the Commission would retain full discretion as to the ultimate decision. However, importantly, the Commission’s decision-making would be aided by a more robust oral hearing. No fundamental changes to the EU’s administrative model would be required for the implementation of this proposal. For practical reasons it is suggested to trial this proposal first in the Commission’s Article 101 and 102 TFEU investigations.","PeriodicalId":340197,"journal":{"name":"Comparative & Global Administrative Law eJournal","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Larger Role for the Hearing Officer: A Modest Proposal\",\"authors\":\"T. Calvani, J. Leahy\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JAENFO/JNX021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article proposes changes to the role of the EU hearing officer and looks, as a starting point, to the US administrative model, in particular the role of the Administrative Law Judge. It is argued that the US model makes better use of its hearing examiners to understand and probe contested points of fact or law. The article sets out a proposal for strengthening the function and responsibilities of the EU hearing officer to also include a review of substantive points of the case. The hearing officer’s substantive findings, in addition to reporting on procedure, would be included in a final public report. These relatively modest changes would provide comfort to the parties that some independent scrutiny of disputed facts had taken place whilst the Commission would retain full discretion as to the ultimate decision. However, importantly, the Commission’s decision-making would be aided by a more robust oral hearing. No fundamental changes to the EU’s administrative model would be required for the implementation of this proposal. For practical reasons it is suggested to trial this proposal first in the Commission’s Article 101 and 102 TFEU investigations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":340197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative & Global Administrative Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative & Global Administrative Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JAENFO/JNX021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative & Global Administrative Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JAENFO/JNX021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文提出了欧盟听证官角色的转变,并以美国的行政模式,特别是行政法法官的角色为切入点。有人认为,美国模式更好地利用听证审查员来理解和探讨有争议的事实或法律问题。该条提出了一项加强欧盟听证官员职能和责任的建议,其中还包括对案件实质性要点的审查。听证干事的实质性调查结果除了关于程序的报告外,还将列入最后的公开报告。这些相对适度的改变将使当事各方感到安慰,即对有争议的事实进行了一些独立审查,同时委员会将保留对最终决定的充分酌情决定权。然而,重要的是,委员会的决策将得到更有力的口头听证的帮助。实施这一提议不需要对欧盟的行政模式做出根本改变。出于实际原因,建议首先在委员会第101条和第102条TFEU调查中试用这一建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Larger Role for the Hearing Officer: A Modest Proposal
This article proposes changes to the role of the EU hearing officer and looks, as a starting point, to the US administrative model, in particular the role of the Administrative Law Judge. It is argued that the US model makes better use of its hearing examiners to understand and probe contested points of fact or law. The article sets out a proposal for strengthening the function and responsibilities of the EU hearing officer to also include a review of substantive points of the case. The hearing officer’s substantive findings, in addition to reporting on procedure, would be included in a final public report. These relatively modest changes would provide comfort to the parties that some independent scrutiny of disputed facts had taken place whilst the Commission would retain full discretion as to the ultimate decision. However, importantly, the Commission’s decision-making would be aided by a more robust oral hearing. No fundamental changes to the EU’s administrative model would be required for the implementation of this proposal. For practical reasons it is suggested to trial this proposal first in the Commission’s Article 101 and 102 TFEU investigations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Principles of Administrative Discretion: A Case Study of Pakistan The Tension between Global Public Procurement Law and Nationalist/Populist Tendencies: Proposals for Reform Inhabiting Different Realities: Incrementalism, Paradigms and the New Prospect Public Administration Reform in Bulgaria: Top-down and Externally-driven Approach Una Revisión a Los Servicios Públicos de Solidaridad en la Unión Europea (A Review to the Notion of Social Services of General Interest in the European Union )
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1