7. Conclusions

as such, but also in the normative framework itself, which is used by the criminal court especially when an offender is part of or concerned with the government.

More recently, we see a strong development of administrative enforcement, partially using (administrative) courts. This applies in situations where administrative authorities have the power to use administrative sanctions—like withdrawal of a decision or a decision related to an administrative fine—and in the process of applying these sanctions the administrative authorities must consider the written and unwritten legal principles of good administration. These principles play a preventive role here, but it is also possible that in the frame of administrative review by the (administrative) court these principles are also used, but in this case as review norms. The institution of the ombudsman is also using and developing these principles of good governance in a similar way, and the Court of Audit institutions are using these norms—as principles of good governance or principles of good auditing—when fulfilling their enforcement tasks.

In situations where the enforcement is done by the civil court and it is related to persons or institutions connected with the government, including the administration, the civil court will also use the principles of good governance or administration as review norms.

In addition to the national level, we see a development of enforcement on the international level, in the form of supervision or by way of sanction. International public or private institutions use such enforcement, and in some cases under the control of international courts.

Finally, there are also non-traditional enforcement modes in situations where the traditional enforcement mechanisms are not adequate. Some examples are negotiating between the offender and the enforcing authority, naming and shaming by the enforcing authority, and excluding of parties (from participating in a body or barring them from exercising their profession).

7. Conclusions

Good governance norms are necessary to prevent maladministration and corruption. We have made good governance more concrete by enumerating six groups of principles (properness, transparency, participation, effectiveness, accountability, and human rights). Their content may be tailored for each of the three branches: the legislator, the administration, and the judiciary.

We conclude that the balance of powers may be interpreted and applied differently in different constitutional systems. In the Netherlands, the fourth power is of increasing importance in strengthening the system of checks and balances.

The principles can be found in many documents of national, regional, and international context. The principles are formulated as fundamental legal principles, concrete legal norms, and policy guidelines. In the next chapter, good governance is discussed from a multi-level perspective.