Remedies against sedentary management

Bart Jan van EttekovenBart Jan van Ettekoven• 3r+• 3r+Chairman of the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of StateChairman of the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State1 d • 1 d •Follow ''? Last Thursday (yes, really, on King's Day), I attended a meeting in Riga with colleague Michiel Tjepkema of the highest administrative courts in Europe about remedies for sedentary administration. It turned out that not only the Netherlands is looking for an effective remedy against not taking or not making timely decisions. Many countries use the negative model (“fictitious rejection”), but recognize that this model does little good to citizens. Other countries use the positive model (“tacit approval”), but recognize that it can be at odds with the interests of third parties and often violates (EU) law. These countries increasingly have a long list of exceptions. In fact, France is so much that it's getting close to the negative model again. Some countries, such as the Netherlands, have the neutral model (“fictitious decision”). No other EU country has the figure of 'our' administrative penalty payment for not taking timely decisions. Intended to financially encourage the board to decide in time, but unfortunately too often has become a business model. In the fight against stagnant administration, other countries have the use of the Ombudsman, a parliamentary committee or supervision by the PG over the governing body. In the face of malicious inertia on the part of the administration, some EU countries have the options of personal liability of officials and criminal prosecution. It is reassuring that no country claims to have the ultimate solution. Shared care: the strength of governing bodies (people, resources, organization), and being careful that the judiciary does not make timely decisions when appealed does not become a stamping machine that contributes little to socially effective justice.