The Finnish legal system shows only limited judicial deference to administrative discretion. Instead, more value is generally accorded to effective judicial protection and other related factors, such as adequate access to a court, guarantees of procedural fairness, the sufficiently broad scope of judicial review, effective remedies and a relatively active role for the administrative courts. In Finland, as in several other continental European jurisdictions with separate administrative courts, procedural law tends to attribute an active role to the courts. The courts exercise judicial power and play a central role in offering legal protection to individuals affected by administrative decision-making. Judicial review can constrain the exercise of executive power because of its emphasis on adherence to the law and legal principles. On the other hand, investigation of the advisability and expediency of an administrative decision falls outside the jurisdiction of the administrative courts. A further limit to judicial power is based on constitutional principles, more precisely on the separation of powers doctrine. According to that doctrine, the actual adoption of an administrative decision belongs exclusively to the sphere of executive power.
|Titel på gästpublikation||Deference to the Administration in Judicial Review : Comparative Perspectives|
|Status||Publicerad - 2019|
|MoE-publikationstyp||A3 Del av bok eller annan forskningsbok|
|Namn||Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law|