Interaction between the institution of discretion and the principle of legal certainty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15053196Keywords:
discretionary powers, administrative discretion, rule of law, principle of legal certainty, legitimate expectationsAbstract
This article is dedicated to the study of the essence and value of discretionary powers of public authorities by clarifying the mechanisms of interaction between the institution of discretion and the principle of legal certainty.
The principle of legal certainty, along with other elements, constitutes an integral part of the concept of the rule of law. However, at the same time, it is an independent and multifaceted phenomenon with its own structural elements that define its content.
Based on this characterization, the author examines the impact of the institution of discretion on the principle of legal certainty, both through the internal structural components of the principle of legal certainty on the one hand, and through other related elements of the rule of law doctrine on the other.
The conducted study of the interrelation between the institution of discretion and the principle of legal certainty reveals the symbiotic dimension of the interaction between these two legal phenomena.
The author explores the mechanisms and methods of interaction between the institution of discretion and the principle of legal certainty. Taking into account the element-by-element characterization of the principle of legal certainty, the research also examines the symbiotic dimension of their interaction as legal phenomena.
Since, on the one hand, the institution of discretion of public authorities is aimed at ensuring adherence to the rule of law, of which the principle of legal certainty is an indispensable component, and on the other hand, the very principle of legal certainty determines and structures the functioning of the institution of discretion, the author identifies a stable interconnection between these legal concepts.
In this context, a legal symbiosis is observed—namely, a successful combination of heterogeneous elements that mutually reinforce each other and contribute to the establishment and strengthening of both the principle of legal certainty and the institution of discretion.
