{"title":"机构自由裁量权","authors":"Jānis Neimanis","doi":"10.17721/2227-796x.2019.4.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article considers discretion enjoyed by institutions. Discretion enjoyed by institutions implies that law grants а right to choose between various legal implications for the person who applies the law. Discretion is а legislative tool which helps achieve а high level of fairness in an individual case. Discretion of institutions provided by lawmakers enables an institution to consider the specific circumstances of а specific situation and reach а fairer result. However, even such “freedom” imposes an obligation on the institution to apply it in а responsible and correct manner. Discretion does not mean that the institution is granted absolute “freedom” or arbitrariness. The scope of control of discretion in а higher institution and а court differs. А higher institution independently carries out all feasibility assessments for а second time based on merit, ultimately reaching а similar or different result. The courts can verify the validity of the activities undertaken by the public administration: a) failure to use discretion; b) abuse of discretion; c) misuse of discretion. The courts do not have the right to take а decision on the most appropriate result since it leads to violation of the principle of separation of powers.","PeriodicalId":7222,"journal":{"name":"Administrative law and process","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DISCRETION OF INSTITUTIONS\",\"authors\":\"Jānis Neimanis\",\"doi\":\"10.17721/2227-796x.2019.4.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article considers discretion enjoyed by institutions. Discretion enjoyed by institutions implies that law grants а right to choose between various legal implications for the person who applies the law. Discretion is а legislative tool which helps achieve а high level of fairness in an individual case. Discretion of institutions provided by lawmakers enables an institution to consider the specific circumstances of а specific situation and reach а fairer result. However, even such “freedom” imposes an obligation on the institution to apply it in а responsible and correct manner. Discretion does not mean that the institution is granted absolute “freedom” or arbitrariness. The scope of control of discretion in а higher institution and а court differs. А higher institution independently carries out all feasibility assessments for а second time based on merit, ultimately reaching а similar or different result. The courts can verify the validity of the activities undertaken by the public administration: a) failure to use discretion; b) abuse of discretion; c) misuse of discretion. The courts do not have the right to take а decision on the most appropriate result since it leads to violation of the principle of separation of powers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7222,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative law and process\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative law and process\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17721/2227-796x.2019.4.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative law and process","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17721/2227-796x.2019.4.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The article considers discretion enjoyed by institutions. Discretion enjoyed by institutions implies that law grants а right to choose between various legal implications for the person who applies the law. Discretion is а legislative tool which helps achieve а high level of fairness in an individual case. Discretion of institutions provided by lawmakers enables an institution to consider the specific circumstances of а specific situation and reach а fairer result. However, even such “freedom” imposes an obligation on the institution to apply it in а responsible and correct manner. Discretion does not mean that the institution is granted absolute “freedom” or arbitrariness. The scope of control of discretion in а higher institution and а court differs. А higher institution independently carries out all feasibility assessments for а second time based on merit, ultimately reaching а similar or different result. The courts can verify the validity of the activities undertaken by the public administration: a) failure to use discretion; b) abuse of discretion; c) misuse of discretion. The courts do not have the right to take а decision on the most appropriate result since it leads to violation of the principle of separation of powers.