ALRAQABA . ISSUE 15
13
2. The adverse administrative decision, a non-
causation decision:
Administrative law legitimists distinguish
between the terms “causation” and “cause”.
They consider the latter as having a case
that compels the administration to issue a
decision. Being a pillar of the administrative
body, its absence results in the nullification of
the decision. The legitimists believe that the
first concept - the administration disclosing the
cause- is not an action that the administration
is obliged to take unless the law stipulated
otherwise.
If this is the case, the adverse administrative
decision may not be caused, since causation
discloses the reasons behind the decision.
Causation, therefore, depends on having
an issued administrative decision from the
administrative body that includes several
issues, e.g., announcement, due to the
issuance of the decision. This action contradicts
the very nature of the adverse administrative
decision, which calls for having a metaphoric
existence that is implied while in reality does
not exist. In this case, it leads to a lack of or
refraining from taking action. This in return,
contradicts the announcement giving that the
latter is a positive action, after all; doesn›t an
existence come from nothingness?
3. Adverse Administrative Decision may not
be exposed:
The administrative decision is not executed
when encountering individuals unless it is
known. Among the methods to do so is to be
disseminated. The nature of dissemination
implies having an established matter outside - a
case of a physical nature- to be announced.
Since the adverse administrative decision
has no physical presence, its implications
may include “inability to be exposed, neither
through an announcement to the concerned
party - being an individual decision- nor through
dissemination, if it was a regulatory bylaw. In
other words, by nature, an adverse stance may
not be exposed.”
Part Two: Distinguishing between an
adverse administrative decision and
other administrative decisions
An adverse decision may be confused
with other administrative actions, such as
the administration’s failure to practice its
discretionary power, administrative deficit,
and lack of following up the execution of the
decision, etc.
We are interested in studying one of these
actions, specifically, the administrative decision,
since our research revolves around one
of its types.
We shall not discuss the differences between
an adverse administrative decision and an
explicit decision, as it is obvious and does not
need any explanation. It is however important to
distinguish between “an implicit decision” and
“an Adverse Administrative Decision.” The two
terms may cause confusion due to the basis of
their formation, which is when an administration
takes an adverse stance against a specific
matter. In this situation we believe that: an
implicit administrative decision is defined as
“ the legal action free willingly taken by the
administration and is derived from its silence
in particular circumstances. It results in setting
up, amending, or nullifying a specific legal
position.”
The legal base of the implicit decision is
derived, in a wide sense, from a law that
compels the administration to respond to a
Legislations
