Administrative Adjudication: Between Legal Interpretation and Social Justice

Abstract

Abstract

The study addresses a significant topic which is the role of administrative judiciary in striking a balance between the necessity of upholding the law and legislation, on the one hand, and achieving social justice, on the other. In this context, the study discusses the role and importance of the administrative judiciary as a fundamental safeguard for the rights of individuals and groups. It also explores the interpretation of legal and administrative rules in light of social justice principles, which require the protection of vulnerable groups and the assurance of an equitable distribution of opportunities and services. Furthermore, the study focuses on the challenges facing the administrative judiciary in this regard, including the tension that sometimes arises between strict adherence to legal provisions and the imperative of achieving social justice. The core issue of this study lies in the challenge facing administrative courts: how to strike a balance between the literal application of legal provisions and the demands of social justice. This challenge is particularly acute given the increasingly complex socio-economic realities in Iraq and Egypt, which create a gap between rigid legal texts and societal needs. Furthermore, differences in interpretive approaches between the two countries impact the protection of rights and the safeguarding of the public interest.

This study employs an analytical approach to examine legal texts and administrative court rulings in Iraq and Egypt, focusing on their interpretation and their role in achieving social justice. Additionally, a comparative method is used to identify similarities and differences between the legal systems of both nations.

To comprehensively address all aspects of this study—titled "Administrative Judiciary: Between Legal Interpretation and Social Justice"—the research is divided into two sections.