The current judicial organization, characterized by jurisdictional monism or unity of jurisdiction, comprises first instance courts, appellate courts and a single Supreme Court. The same judge is competent to hear all cases.
So there is currently no administrative jurisdictional order.
However, the Constitution of November 8, 2016 provides for three orders of separate jurisdictions, the judiciary with the Court of Cassation, the administrative order headed by the State Council and the accounting and financial order with the Court of Cassation. Accounts as supreme jurisdiction. This new organization, pending the adoption of the legislative texts which organizes its various components, is not yet effective.
1963: Creation of the administrative chamber with a single Judgment Panel
1970: Admission for the first time of the responsibility of the administration with the judgment society of centaurs road of January 14, 1970
1978: Addition of administrative electoral disputes to the attributions of the administrative Chamber
1994: Creation of 2 Judgment Formations
1997: Institution of the Public Ministry – Institution of the Auditor’s function
2004: Entry of University Professors and Officials to the Administrative Chamber
2017: Creation of 4 Judgment Formations
The criteria of competence are the following:
- Administrative act for the actions for excess of power
- Presence of a public person for cassation proceedings
The laws :
Law n° 94-440 of August 16, 1994 determining the composition, organization, powers and functioning of the supreme Court amended and supplemented by law n° 97-243 of 25 april 1997
Law n° 72-833 of December 21, 1972 on the civil, commercial and administrative procedure law
2.2.1. General organisation of the administrative jurisdictional order
Is administrative justice rendered by specialized courts or by specialized chambers set within jurisdictions with a general competence? Does the administrative jurisdiction include several levels of jurisdiction (first instance, appeal, cassation )? Are there specialized administrative courts?
Administrative justice is rendered by all Courts, courts of first instance, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court is, however, the exclusive Judge of the appeal for excess power.
The coming administrative jurisdictional order will be composed of the Council of State, the Administrative Courts of Appeal and the administrative courts.
2.2.2. Internal organisation of administrative courts and composition of the bench of judges
Are administrative courts organized in chambers or divisions? Are these chambers or divisions specialized? Are there several degrees of formation of the court (single judge, collegiate panels with three, five ... judges, full court)?
The Administrative Chamber is organized in Formations. It currently includes 4 judging Formations: 1st A, 1st B, 2nd A and 2nd B.
All Formations includes a least 3 Judges.
2.2.3. Do administrative courts have advisory powers (advice to the administration, government, parliament, etc.) ?
The Administrative Chamber has a very limited consultative power. It is only called to give opinions when texts provide for it, in particular the law relating to the National Commission of the Human Rights which imposes the opinion of the Administrative Chamber on the rules of procedure of the National Commission of the Rights of the Man.
The future Council of State will have consultative powers in accordance with the Constitution.
2.2.4. Tools and documentary resources available to judges
The Administrative Chamber subscribes to AJDA, RFDA and the Lexis Nexis legal database. It has a jurisprudential database called COMOE and an Integrated Management System of the Administrative Chamber (SIGCA).
How is the recruitment of judges organised (competitive exam, political appointment, peer election…)? What are their statutory guarantees while in office, particularly in terms of independence?
The main route of recruitment is the competition, but there are recruitments on the outside tour.
The Statute of the Judiciary offers a certain number of guarantees, notably the irremovability, the functional protection and the out-of-hierarchy status granted to the Councilors of the Administrative Chamber.
What kind of petition may applicants file before administrative courts? May applicants only request the invalidation of an administrative act? May administrative courts rule on compensatory claims?
The applicants may lodge appeals for excess of powers and compensatory remedies.
Are there any emergency procedures available before administrative courts? In the affirmative, do they cover the whole field of administrative law or do they concern only specific areas of administrative action (individual freedoms, public procurement, etc.)?
There are emergency procedures: stay of execution and administrative summary.
What are the rules governing the conduct of litigation before administrative courts? What are the guarantees offered to litigants? What are the principles governing the relationship between judges and litigants?
The rules governing the procedure before the judge of the Administrative Chamber are relatively different depending on the referrals, with the common ground the adversarial principle.
The procedure is inquisitorial.
In relation to which norm (regulations, laws, international conventions, constitution ...) do administrative judges control administrative acts? Are they competent to control the conformity of laws and regulations with the Constitution (constitutional judicial review)? Are they competent to control the conformity of laws and regulations with international treaties (judicial review of international law)?
The judge of the Administrative Chamber is competent to control the administrative acts.
It is not competent to control the conformity of laws and regulations with the Constitution, which is the responsibility of the Constitutional Council. It is also not competent to control the conformity of laws and regulations with international treaties.
3.5. Scope and nature of administrative judicial review
May administrative judges control all acts taken by the administration? Are certain acts exempted from this control?
The Administrative Chamber only controls the acts of the administration that adversely affect the citizens, with the exception of acts of government.
Which degree of control is used by administrative judges? Does this degree of control vary according to the nature of the challenged act and/or the margin of appreciation left to the administration?
In general, the intensity of the Court's control varies depending on whether the administration has related or discretionary jurisdiction. In case of jurisdiction, the Court extends its control to the legal characterization of the facts and, in certain rare cases, pushes it to the appreciation of the very meaning of the decision. In the case of discretionary jurisdiction, the Court limited its control to the substantive accuracy of the facts underlying the administrative decision, but found itself competent to censure the Administration's manifest error of assessment.
When judges disagree with a ruling, are they allowed to express a dissenting opinion? In the affirmative, may they express it in all cases?
Judges who participated in the judgment but who disagree with the meaning of the decision can not publicly express their opinion.
Are there alternative dispute resolution methods? Please specify.
Yes, there are alternative methods of dispute resolution, including:
conciliation (Articles 133 and 134 of the Code of Civil, Commercial and Administrative Procedure, Articles 166 and following of the Code des Marches Publics).
mediation (the Mediator of the Republic, according to article 7 of the organic law n ° 2007-540 of 1 August 2007 relative to the Mediator of the Republic, has for mission to settle, by the mediation, the disputes of all nature which can oppose citizens between them or citizens to the public administration).
Is there a specific digital procedure for the submission of claims?
May judges amend administrative acts by substituting their own analysis to that of the administration or may they only invalidate them? May they compel the administration to act in a specific way (power of injunction, penalties)?
No, the judge of the Administrative Chamber can not substitute his own analyzes. It cancels or rejects the appeals.
He currently does not have the power of injunction or power of coercion, but in some decisions, he ordered the administration to act in a given direction.
In the text of the law relating to the Council of State in the process of adoption before the National Assembly, the powers of injunction and penalty are provided.
To whom do decisions rendered by administrative judges apply (absolute effect – erga omnes - of res judicata, relative effect of res judicata)? What criterion is used to choose between these two options?
Decisions rendered by the Administrative Chamber are binding on everyone.
May rulings of administrative courts be challenged? What is the time limit for appeal? Before which authorities / jurisdictions can these rulings be challenged?
Decisions rendered by the Administrative Chamber may be challenged before the Administrative Chamber by the procedures of third-party opposition, withdrawal, revision, referral to the formations in case of cassation.
There is no time limit to exercise these requests.
2013-2014: 446 cases
2014-2015: 510 cases
2015-2016: 679 cases
2016-2017: 726 cases
2017-2018: 1042 cases
The average time to judgment is 2 years.
The annual budget of the Administrative Chamber is 500 millions CFA francs.
© AIHJA - IASAJ Copyright