Administrative justice of Germany: development prospects

Abstract

The article is devoted to the prospects for the development of administrative justice in Germany. On the wave of reforms initiated to a large extent by European law, there were those states in which administrative- legal protection was traditionally aimed primarily at ensuring the integrity of the objective legal order and for a long time did not pay enough attention to the protection of citizens in urgent cases and in case of administrative inaction. In contrast, in Germany, where administrative procedural law is characterized by the concept of subjective legal protection and the right to effective legal protection has been guaranteed at the constitutional level since 1949, the need for change has been negligible.
 The dynamism that has characterized the development of administrative justice in many European states since the 1990s will continue in the coming years and will further change administrative and legal protection. In the Federal Republic of Germany, which is characterized by a paradigm of subjective legal protection, legal protection will be enriched by prosecutorial actions from associations and possibly citizens. This applies primarily to those areas where legal norms for the protection of certain public interests suffer from the structural weakness of law enforcement, which is partly caused by the fact that there is no possibility for individual actions in case of violation of these norms.
 There is a need to fill gaps in legal protection at the European and international levels. It is necessary to pay attention to the elimination of gaps in legal protection not only in the law of the European Union, but also in relation to possible violations of rights by the measures of international organizations. As long as effective legal remedies do not exist there, the European Union and its Member States must offer alternative legal protection, which is also based on universal guarantees of respect for human rights. Alternative conflict resolution mechanisms will continue to be tested. Out-of-court and judicial mediation will become more important. However, given the principle of administrative legality, their scope will remain limited. Serious changes in legal protection may occur due to the adjustment of the ratio between administrative and judicial means of protection. In particular, in the case of decisions on complex technical, economic, social and environmental issues, as well as decisions that must take into account a large number of interests, it may be functionally appropriate to strengthen control at the administrative level.
 Digitization will change not only the internal working processes of the courts, but also the communication between those seeking legal protection and the courts. It can provide greater transparency for all participants in the process, but it can also make access more difficult for those who have difficulties communicating with new media. Therefore, when implementing e-justice, special care should be taken to avoid a digital divide in legal protection. In addition, the digitalization of the judicial system has great potential to support judges in their work, not to replace them.