Theoretical and Practical Aspects of the Modernisation of Administrative Procedure in Slovenia

TITLE: Theoretical and Practical Aspects of the Modernisation of Administrative Procedure in Slovenia

PROJECT CODE: V5-2383

PROJECT MANAGER: izr. prof. dr. Bruna Žuber

COORDINATOR: 583 - University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Law

PROJECT PARTNERS:

• 590 - University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Public Administration
• 1608 - Institute for Comparative Law at the Faculty of Law in Ljubljana
• 503 - Institute of Public Administration at the Faculty of Law in Ljubljana

DURATION OF THE PROJECT: 1. 10. 2023 - 30. 9. 2026

SCOPE OF FUNDING: EUR 120,000.00, price category A

PROJECT TEAM COMPOSITION:

583 - Univesity of Ljubljana, Faculty of Law

• 39612 - dr. Bruna Žuber
• 51259 - dr. Marjan Kos 
• 58385 - Špela Lovšin 
• 58117 - Matevž Bedič 
• 20833 - dr. Erik Kerševan 

590 - University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Public Administration

• 23676 - dr. Polonca Kovač 
• 31026 - dr. Tina Sever 
• 32755 - dr. Mirko Pečarič 
• 36387 - dr. Jernej Podlipnik 

1608 - Institute for Comparative Law at the Faculty of Law in Ljubljana

• 27793 - Saša Šest 
• 52415 - dr. Katja Štemberger Brizani 
• 25611 - dr. Matija Damjan 

503 - Institute of Public Administration at the Faculty of Law in Ljubljana

• 7436 - dr. Rajko Pirnat 

FINANCERS:

The proposed research project, entitled "Theoretical and Practical Aspects of the Modernization of Administrative Procedure in Slovenia," focuses on the analysis of the professional basis for the preparation and implementation of the new General Administrative Procedure Act (ZUP) with a comparative and practical study of the scope and problematic nature of procedural institutions.

It is divided into three main content sections, each further divided into separate (sub)chapters that follow in a logical sequence.

In the first section, the proposed research project first examines the development of administrative procedure in Slovenia, together with the legal tradition on which the ZUP is based, and critically evaluates the changes to the ZUP to date, particularly in light of contemporary (development) trends in public administration (e.g., the concept of good public administration, deregulation and privatization, globalization of business, Europeanization in the convergence of principles and law, digital transformation). This is followed by an analysis of administrative, administrative court, and constitutional court practice, with an emphasis on those procedural institutions or phases of administrative proceedings that pose the most problems in practice (e.g., the scope of application of the ZUP, rules on jurisdiction, identification of the roles of individual entities in administrative proceedings). It also analyzes explicitly the practice of the ECtHR and the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding constitutional procedural guarantees in administrative proceedings and assesses their implementation in Slovenia. To ensure the rule of law, trust in the law, and legal certainty, it also examines the significance, scope, and content of the administration's commitment to the court's positions. It places particular emphasis on a critical analysis of (current) measures adopted with the aim of digitizing administrative proceedings, taking into account European trends in digitization, artificial intelligence, and automation in administrative procedures, as well as a theoretical presentation of institutions that are not regulated by the ZUP or are only partially regulated, such as guarantee acts, real acts, alternative dispute resolution in administrative matters, and competitive procedures.

The second section examines the guidelines for the development of administrative procedure at EU level, with an emphasis on the 2016 draft Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on open, efficient, and independent EU administration and the model rules that formed the basis for the draft EU regulation on the "European ZUP," and selected foreign administrative procedure regulations (German, Italian, and Croatian), both from the perspective of normative regulation and (administrative and administrative-judicial) practice. This analysis aims to identify similarities and differences with the Slovenian regulation of administrative procedure and, based on a critical assessment of procedural solutions and institutions adopted in foreign legal systems (which are unknown in Slovenia or regulated differently), to formulate possible proposals for future regulation.

The last (third) section provides prescriptive guidelines for eliminating shortcomings and improving the legal regulation of administrative procedures in the future in two sections: first, according to established institutions or procedural solutions in the ZUP (scope and reach of understanding of administrative procedures and validity of the ZUP, fundamental principles of the ZUP (meaning, content, number, question of their transformation), jurisdiction, communication between authorities and parties, service, deadlines and hearings, return to the previous state, maintenance of order and costs of the procedure, digitization of administrative procedures, initiation of proceedings and requests by parties, general rules of procedure, evidence, decisions and rulings, ordinary legal remedies, extraordinary legal remedies, enforcement), and then on procedural institutions or solutions that are not recognized by the current legal system or are only regulated marginally. In this part, it critically assesses the advantages and disadvantages of introducing new institutions into administrative proceedings (guarantee acts, alternative resolution of administrative matters, real acts of public administration, competitive proceedings). It presents concrete possibilities for the digitization and automation of administrative proceedings, the introduction of artificial intelligence into administrative procedures, and permanent, targeted education and training for public officials.

Phase 1 (12 months):

• Activities: analysis of the current regulatory framework governing administrative proceedings, theoretical perspectives, and existing administrative and judicial practice.
• Results: presentation of the development of administrative procedure in Slovenia and an outline of the legal tradition on which the current ZUP is based; critical analysis of the adoption of the ZUP and previous amendments to the ZUP; analysis of administrative practice by individual institutions or stages of the procedure; nbsp;analysis of administrative court practice by individual institutions or stages of the procedure; analysis of constitutional court practice relating to administrative procedure; assessment of the current digitization of administrative procedure and analysis of European trends in digitization, artificial intelligence, and automation in administrative procedure;  study of the significance, scope, and content of the administration's dependence on the positions of the courts;  analysis of the practice of the ECtHR and the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding constitutional procedural guarantees in administrative proceedings, together with an assessment of their observance in Slovenia;   theoretical presentation of institutions not provided for in the current administrative procedure regulations and initial definition of their place in the normative framework of administrative procedure.

Phase 2 (8 months):

• Activities: studying guidelines for the development of administrative procedures at the EU level and regulations, as well as the practice of applying administrative procedures in selected foreign legal systems
• Results: analysis of European guidelines for the development of administrative procedures and assessment of the possibility and suitability of their application in our legal system; presentation of selected foreign administrative procedure regulations with identification of the advantages and disadvantages of their rules and assessment of the possibilities and suitability for application of individual institutions or procedural solutions in our legal system.

Phase 3 (16 months):

• Activities: formulation of specific proposals for normative solutions for the future legal regulation of administrative procedure in Slovenia, which will be formulated in two sets (specific proposals based on established institutions or procedural solutions in the ZUP, and particular proposals regarding possible future normative regulation of procedural institutions or solutions that are not recognized by the current legal system or are only regulated marginally), and specific proposals regarding permanent targeted education and training of public officials.
• Results: formulation of specific proposals for a revised regulation of administrative procedure in Slovenia in the future, together with a critical analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of all proposed changes.