The Role of Expedited Administrative Judiciary in Balancing Public and Private Interests

Abstract

The challenge of reconciling the public interests of maintaining societal stability and upholding public order with the private interests of safeguarding individual rights and freedoms stands as a primary obstacle for administrative justice systems across numerous countries. In this context, the imperative role of expedited administrative judiciary becomes essential in striking a delicate balance between these conflicting interests, serving as a crucial mediator for the two disputing parties. The expedited administrative judiciary relies on established laws and principles operating to facilitate swift and effective dispute resolution. Through this process, it has the capacity to issue temporary decisions promptly, particularly in response to urgent suspension requests, preventing potential harm to the public interest. Nevertheless, it is crucial for this judicial body to ensure a judicious and equitable approach, taking into consideration the rights of individuals involved. However, maintaining this balance necessitates affording the private party the opportunity to present its case and safeguarding its legal rights from infringement. The urgent administrative judiciary must possess the capability to reconcile public and private interests by delivering prompt and fair decisions. This ensures the preservation of societal stability and protection of individual rights concurrently. It is imperative, however, that these actions do not compromise the government's authority to enact public policies serving the greater public interest. This thesis undertakes an analytical comparative study of the urgent administrative judiciary and its role in harmonizing public and private interests within the legal frameworks of France, Egypt, and Iraq, including the Kurdistan Region through organizing into four main chapters. The first chapter delves into the intellectual underpinnings of the urgent administrative judiciary. This involves elucidating its definition, the nature of urgent administrative lawsuits, and the competent judicial authority. In this sense, the focus extends to analyzing the philosophical and legal foundations that underpin these comparative judicial systems .Meanwhile, the second chapter shifts the focus to examining cases of urgent administrative lawsuits within the legal systems and through comparative judicial applications. This includes the introduction of lawsuits related to halting the implementation of administrative decisions and administrative lawsuits pertaining to other urgent cases. Moreover, the third chapter is dedicated to researching the aspects of balancing public and private interests by the urgent administrative judiciary. It explores the equilibrium between interests and the application scope of the urgent judiciary in this context. Furthermore, it investigates the contemporary mechanisms adopted by the urgent administrative judiciary to restore the balance between public and private interests .On the other hand, the fourth and final chapter delves into the theory applied by the urgent administrative judiciary in achieving a balance between public and private interests. This involves a comprehensive study of the requirements and criteria essential for maintaining this delicate equilibrium. The conclusion of the thesis encompasses a thorough analysis of the findings derived from the comparative study, incorporating insights into challenges faced and potential future developments for the urgent administrative judiciary in France, Egypt, Iraq, and the Kurdistan Region. It further provides a set of recommendations tailored for the Iraqi administrative judiciary and the Kurdistan Region. These recommendations aim to bolster the elements defining their existence and strengthen the foundations essential for safeguarding individual rights and freedoms. The proposed measures involve a deep understanding of modern mechanisms and theories utilized in comparative administrative justice, particularly those geared towards achieving a delicate balance between public and private interests.