Specification of the Principles
273
can be realized in different ways. Often it depends on the topic, but citizens’ initiatives and referenda are good examples. The objectives of participation can be different: it can be from the perspective of the citizen, but it can also be done for management reasons. For legitimizing the aims of the government, different forms of participation can be very relevant. On the issue of transparency, we distinguished between the narrow and the broad notions, which can be summarized as a more or less open functioning of the institutions of the state. This topic of transparency is often related to the activities of the government, like meetings, the forms of access to information, and the different types of government action. The existing restrictions become significant when dealing with issues of privacy.
2. Part II: The Specification of the Principles of Good Governance In Part II, we specified the six principles of good governance. We started with the principle of properness, which has also been developed under the name of the principle of natural justice. It is a principle which has originally been developed and specified by the judiciary as an unwritten principle. The second, the principle of transparency, is related to the concept of democracy. Transparency is connected to the principle of participation which has its roots in the concept of democracy. The principles of effectiveness and accountability both have a relationship to the institutional structure and functioning. The last principle is the human rights principle which is linked to the rule of law but also to democracy. The principle of proper administration and the specification in subprinciples are seen as the starting points for the principles of good governance and can be found in legislation, case law, policy rules, and in ombudsman reports. In this study, eight subprinciples of proper administration are distinguished: 1. The prohibition on misuse of power, with its four distinguished specifications: against the purpose of power, striving for an incorrect goal, inappropriate use, and inconsistent use. 2. The prohibition on arbitrariness, with four forms of manifestation: arbitrariness grasped as evident unreasonableness, visible unreasonableness in which there is a balance of interest but it is not acceptable, that cannot be done reasonably (marginal judicial review), and is not unfair. 3. The principle of legal certainty in which we distinguished two aspects: formal legal certainty in the sense of recognizable rights and duties, and substantive legal certainty in the sense of durability of rules, orders that must be complied with, protection of rights, and the prohibition of retroactive effect. 4. The principle of confidence (or legitimate expectations) as worked out in general by policy rules, directives, or circulars. In concrete cases, the following specification criteria for creating confidence apply: who, in what context, how, and by which disposition. 5. The principle of equality, which is split into equality for the law and equality of administration and encompassing: no predisposition, no negative discrimination, no positive discrimination, and equal spread of costs made in the general interest. 6. The principle of proportionality in general is focused on a right balance between means and aims, and more specifically it applies to administrative sanctions. 7. The principle of carefulness, where we note the difference between the substantive and formal components. Substantive carefulness means a careful balance of interest. In formal carefulness, steps in procedure of ordering are specified: (a) treatment, (b) research, (c) consultation, and (d) publication.
