252 KB0 KB201820252024Svoboda, Tomášštevilka:2letnik:22str. 165-183, 259-260DOI:10.17573/cepar.2024.2.08COBISSID_HOST:218277123ISSN:2591-2240URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-NO3SH2K9en= University of Ljubljana PressCentral European Public Administration Reviewadministrative justicejavna upravamehka zakonodajanezavezujoč aktnon-binding actpravna državapriporočilopublic administrationrecommendationrule of lawsoft lawupravno sodstvoTackling disinformation through public administration recommendations – the Czech experience|Purpose: The aim of this paper is to critically evaluate the practice of public administration, in which it influences the addressees of public administration not through classical forms of public administration (e.g. administrative decisions) but by issuing recommendations to third parties, who then carry out regulatory interventions. Design/Methodology/Approach: The paper employs qualitative research methodology and a case study approach, focusing on the analysis of the specific situation in the Czech legal environment (including existing case law), which it frames as a broader issue that can be replicated and thus requires a more general solution. Findings: The text critiques the conclusion drawn from the Czech administrative court case law, which holds that public administration recommendations, if not legally binding, are not subject to judicial review. This conclusion suggests, at first glance, that public administration recommendations are an activity that has no legal limits. However, this interpretation is challenged in particular from the perspective of the rule of law. Specifically, the regulatory model outlined above, where public administration (the state) achieves its objectives by influencing third parties, raises concerns. Practical Implications: It is inadvisable to view non-binding public administration activity as incapable of infringing upon or otherwise influencing the rights of the addressees of public administration. Political accountability in this area seems inadequate, particularly because of a potential lack of transparency. On the contrary, changes to legislation and greater sensitivity from administrative courts towards these non-traditional forms of public administration might be advisable. Originality/Value: The topic can be considered novel, given the limited attention it has received in the literature. This is especially true for national literature (in the case of the Czech background on which the text is primarily based). While it has been explored within EU law in the context of debates about the nature of EU soft law, the issue under study does not align well with soft law (understood as a type of normative legal act, albeit legally non-binding). Therefore, only partial reference can be made to EU law. The topic of the paper is thus more closely related to the general principles of public administration rather than EU law, making it a presumably original contributionNamen: Namen prispevka je kritična ocena prakse javne uprave, po kateri ta na naslovnike ne vpliva z uporabo klasičnih oblik javne uprave (npr. z upravnimi odločbami), temveč s podajanjem priporočil tretjim osebam, ki nato izvajajo regulativne posege.Oblikovanje/metodologija/pristop: Prispevek uporablja kvalitativno raziskovalno metodologijo in študijo primera, pri čemer se osredotoča na analizo specifične situacije v češkem pravnem okolju (vključno z obstoječo sodno prakso), ki jo obravnava kot širšo problematiko, ki se lahko pojavi tudi drugod in zato zahteva splošnejšo rešitev. Ugotovitve: Besedilo kritično obravnava ugotovitev iz sodne prakse češkega upravnega sodišča, ki navaja, da priporočila javne uprave, če niso pravno zavezujoča, niso predmet sodnega nadzora. Na prvi pogled ta ugotovitev nakazuje, da priporočila javne uprave ne poznajo pravnih omejitev. Vendar je ta interpretacija vprašljiva, zlasti z vidika načela pravne države. Posebej skrbi model regulacije, kjer javna uprava (država) svoje cilje dosega z vplivanjem na tretje osebe. Praktične posledice: Zmotno je misliti, da nezavezujoče dejavnosti javne uprave ne morejo posegati ali drugače vplivati na pravice naslovnikov javne uprave, politična odgovornost na tem področju pa je, zlasti zaradi pomanjkljive transparentnosti, neustrezna. Priporočljive so torej spremembe zakonodaje in večja naklonjenost upravnih sodišč netradicionalnim oblikam javne uprave. Izvirnost/vrednost: Tematiko lahko štejemo za novost, saj ji doslej v literaturi ni bilo posvečeno prav veliko pozornosti. To še posebej velja za domačo, češko literaturo, na kateri prispevek temelji. Čeprav je bila tematika obravnavana v okviru prava EU v razpravah o naravi t. i. mehke zakonodaje (soft law), se s to vrsto zakonodaje (ki jo lahko razumemo kot vrsto normativnih, a nezavezujočih pravnih aktov) v resnici ne sklada dobro, zaradi česar se je mogoče le delno sklicevati na pravo EU. Tema prispevka je zato izvirna, saj je bolj povezana s splošnimi načeli javne uprave kot s pravom EUTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaUniverza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za upravo