Search Results

This chapter examines the extent to which private delegates are bound by human rights obligations in the three jurisdictions. First, a justification for the extension of human rights obligations to private delegates of governmental power is offered. What is argued for is a ‘new definition of the public sphere’. Second, an overview of the law in all three jurisdictions is presented, considering the US ‘state action’ doctrine; the definition of ‘public authority’ in Section 6(3)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (including the YL case); and relevant ECJ jurisprudence. Finally, a suitable framework is proposed to hold private delegates liable for human rights violations. It is argued that in the context of private delegation, whether power should be characterized as ‘governmental’ or ‘public’ should depend on its nature, not its holder.

This chapter focuses on private firms which provide services directly to the public under government contracts, and considers whether, and if so how, they should be subject to public law norms. It reviews the case-law on the status of contractors under the Human Rights Act 1998 and in judicial review. It argues that the courts have adopted an unduly narrow approach. More generally, the chapter argues that the problems in this area stem from the government's failure to clarify the status of contractors when contracts are drafted. Although the law provides powers to delegate public functions to contractors, the matter is often left ambiguous. The chapter argues for a stronger public law framework on delegation in which the government is responsible for determining contractor status, subject to review by the courts. This would enhance accountability whilst providing greater certainty for contractors.

This chapter examines the extent to which administrative law obligations are extended to private delegates of governmental power. Part One presents a short overview of the variety of sources of administrative law in the three jurisdictions. Part Two deals with the content of administrative law, in terms of the relevance of the general values of administrative law in responding to the challenges posed by private delegation. Part Three reviews the four primary applicability criteria for administrative law found in the US, England, and the EU: institutional identity, procedure, source of power, and function. The suitability of these criteria for reaching private delegates is assessed. Finally, Part Four comments on the application of freedom of information legislation to private delegates. As in Chapter 6, the argument is made that the reach of administrative law should depend on the nature of the power exercised, not the power-holder.

In the past two decades, the responsibilities delegated to private actors — especially but not only in the United States — have grown in depth and breadth. The much-discussed role assumed by Blackwater (now rebranded ‘Xe’) and other contractors in Iraq is in many ways the tip of the privatization iceberg. Many sectors traditionally regarded as ‘public’ have experienced varying degrees of privatization, from the operation of public utilities to the administration of prisons, from intelligence activities to peacekeeping. Drawing on insights from work on privatization, regulation, and accountability in the emerging field of global administrative law, this book examines private military and security companies through the wider lens of private actors performing public functions. This introductory chapter sets the context for the volume and outlines the contributions made by the various chapters.

The French make it clear in the titles of their texts on administrative law that administrative law is first and foremost about enabling the proper functioning of the administration in its principal activity of serving the public, rather than about the control of the administration. Those concerned with the institutions and principles governing administrative conduct are designated by the label ‘droit administrative’ (administrative law) whilst those about judicial review and governmental liability have the label ‘contentieux administrative’ (administrative litigation). These questions shape this brief treatment of administrative law: what is the public service or a public function, in what way is it different from the private sector, and how does this affect litigation, judicial control of administrative action and governmental liability.

This chapter provides an overview of the context of public health, what it is, how it has been and is defined and categorised in the UK, its functions as well as how the workforce has changed and developed since the mid- nineteenth century drawing on international comparisons. It concludes with an outline of the book content, each chapter concluding with what was achieved and leading into the subsequent chapters.

The third chapter moves on to examine the period 1860-84, looking at the impact of the developing statutory system and its central features. Underpinning the whole analysis is examination of cases illustrating the way the system was applied in practice. It demonstrates the unforeseen consequences of this legislative and centralising process: in essence, the distinctiveness of the Scottish day industrial school system was sacrificed, its original welfarist principles undermined as it became aligned to the British system regulating certified residential industrial and reformatory schools of a penal character. The chapter also covers efforts to restore the original elements of the project and the calls for reappraisal, culminating in Watson’s final, poignant public appearance when he passionately denounced the statutory system.

This chapter focuses on the Gezondheidsraad’s public functioning and the various activities that accompany and follow the publication of its advisory reports. It also discusses some of the strategic instruments that the Gezondheidsraad relies on during this stage for positioning itself in relation to science, policy, and society.

This chapter concerns French administrative law. It examines the characteristic features and principal rules, procedures, and remedies related to administrative activities. The chapter also considers administrative law in its historical perspective and how this has led to a major structural distinction which has been applied in France since the 1789 Revolution the distinction between public and private ‘functions’. It is important to note that in the last decades, there has been a significant impact of EU law on the development of administrative law in the legal system of EU Member States, including France and the United Kingdom. In this respect, the common adoption by European states of general principles such as the principle of legitimate expectation and the principle of proportionality have had the effect of bringing the public law body of these countries closer together.