Administrative Law: Control and Settlements in Public Administration

Posted on Oct 26, 2024 in Law & Jurisprudence

Administrative Law: Control and Settlements

Settlements

There are three ways to settle disputes between the administration and individuals:

  1. Mutual agreement (general rule)
  2. Unilateral decision by the state agency
  3. Court decision

In mutual agreements, the administration issues the settlement decision. The individual can challenge this decision in court.

For unilateral settlements, the administration must decide within 90 days of the final acceptance certificate, renewable up to 180 days.

Control of the Administration

Control refers to maintaining system stability through inspection, verification, testing, and examination, ensuring operations adhere to guidelines.

Types of Control

A) Previous Control: Occurs before the legal act takes effect, often automatically by the administration or through external audits (e.g., Comptroller General).

B) Posteriori Control: Occurs after the legal act takes effect, typically exercised by courts or political authorities to annul the act. The Comptroller increasingly uses this method.

Classification of Control

I) By Organ: Jurisdictional, Political, Administrative (internal or external). Internal control is exercised by the issuing authority, while external control is exercised by other bodies (e.g., Comptroller, Superintendents).

II) By Material:

  • Legality Control: Verifies formal compliance with the law.
  • Financial Control: Verifies compliance with accounting standards.
  • Merit Control: Assesses the suitability of the administrative decision to fulfill its public purpose.

III) Management Control: Evaluates the overall management of public service, focusing on effectiveness in achieving the common good. Primarily exercised by the public through elections.

IV) By Audited Body:

  • Internal Control: Exercised within the same organ, usually by the chief (Article 10 of the Basic Law).
  • External Control: Exercised by constitutionally mandated bodies (e.g., Comptroller General, Superintendents).

Political Control

In Chile, political control is vested in the House of Representatives, which monitors government actions (both government and administrative acts). This control is exercised through:

  • Agreements: The House requests a ruling from the executive on a specific subject.
  • Inquiry Commissions: Decisions have moral implications only.
  • Questioning: Primarily a media event.
  • Accusations (Impeachment): The House acts as prosecutor, and the Senate acts as jury.

The Ombudsman

Chile is one of the few Latin American countries without an Ombudsman. This autonomous body acts as a link between citizens and parliament, addressing complaints against the administration and reporting shortcomings. It plays a crucial role in protecting human rights.

Jurisdictional Administrative Control

Administrative litigation addresses conflicts between the administration and individuals. In Chile, courts have full jurisdiction over judicial review.

Principles of Judicial Review

  1. All administrative acts are subject to judicial review.
  2. No administrative authority is exempt from judicial review.

Doctrinaire Ways of Control

  1. Subjective Resources: Initiated by the injured individual, courts review facts and law, and may award damages.
  2. Objective Resources (Appeal of Cancellation): Broader scope, similar to a popular action, but courts only review legal aspects, not facts, and cannot award damages.
  3. Appeal for Clarification: Requests clarification of a text, act, or contract due to ambiguity.
  4. Enforcement Action: Allows the administration to punish individuals who breach obligations.

Actions in Chilean Law

Chile lacks a specific administrative litigation law but has actions that serve similar purposes:

  • Constitutional actions (e.g., nullity action, claim for loss of nationality)
  • Indirect constitutional actions (e.g., amparo, habeas corpus)
  • Legal actions (e.g., claim for unlawful municipal action, claim for unlawful regional government action)
  • Jurisprudential actions (e.g., mere declaratory action of certainty)

Key Actions

  1. Constitutional Nullity Action: Based on Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution. The competent court is determined by the defendant’s domicile. Procedural rules depend on whether the Treasury is involved.
  2. Claim for Unlawful Municipal Action: Two stages: administrative (within the municipality) and contentious (before the respective Court of Appeals). Challenges resolutions and omissions of the municipality. Officials cannot file this claim.
  3. Claim of Illegality of Regional Governments: Similar to the municipal claim but challenges agreements or resolutions of regional governments.
  4. Mere Declaratory Action of Certainty: Addresses legal uncertainty regarding the meaning of a provision. Requires a state of uncertainty, potential loss or injury to the plaintiff, and lack of alternative legal remedies.

These actions are crucial for judicial review in Chile.