Significance of the Unified Legal System of Administrative Procedures: lessons for Uzbekistan

Introduction

Chapter I. Background and overview of the
administrative procedures in Uzbekistan

1.1. Historical development and recent reforms.

1.2. Current legal framework of administrative
procedures.

Chapter
II. Analysis of administrative procedures in the selected countries

 2.1. Administrative
procedures in Post Soviet countries.

2.2. Administrative
procedures in economically developed countries.

Chapter III. Legal factors for the
reformation of the administrative procedures and
recommendations  

3.1. Applicability of
foreign practices to Uzbekistan.

3.2. Legal factors for the
reformation of the administrative procedures in Uzbekistan.

3.3. Potential challenges
and recommendations for implementation

Conclusion

Introduction

This research presents a comparative
analysis of the extent and importance of a unified legal system in
administrative procedures. It closely examines the common methods used to
promote law in Post soviet and economically developed countries, with the aim
of extracting valuable lessons that can be applied to Uzbekistan. It is
important to acknowledge the limitations of this paper, given the complexities
of the topic.

Problem statement

How can the implementation of a
unified legal system in the field of administrative procedures be improved to
ensure effective governance, transparency, and the protection of citizens’ and
businesses’ rights in Uzbekistan?

Although several years have passed
since the enactment of the Law “On Administrative Procedures”, the
expected results have not yet been achieved through the law. Still, several
issues should be tackled. Since the legal institution of administrative
procedures is relatively new in the legal system of Uzbekistan, almost no
research in this area has been conducted by national scholars. Few scholars
expressed their views only on the terms “administrative act”[1] and “administrative
document”[2],
yet many issues existing as a barrier in the development of administrative
procedures still remain untouched by the scholars.

To unify the application of the Law
“On Administrative Procedures”, to ensure the equality of the
enforcement of the law in all parts of Uzbekistan, entrepreneurs and other
business entities appeal on the unlawful actions and neglect behavior of government
authorities, and decisions of administrative courts because of
misinterpretation of the law by the courts, a legislative intervention is
required. These authorities are vested with the capacity to grant permissions,
licenses, certificate and other types of permissive documents to start, change,
and/or end the business. Besides the need for the unification of administrative
procedures, there are several areas of the law, specifically, where challenges
arise that could hinder the full enforcement of the law. First, the law is
detailed and comprehensive, necessary for thorough regulation. However, this
complexity could pose challenges for individuals and entities to fully
understand and comply with the procedures. In this regard, ensuring
accessibility and clear communication of the procedures to all stakeholders is
crucial. Also, article 21 emphasizes interdepartmental interaction, which is
essential for effective administrative procedures. However, coordination
between different departments and agencies can be challenging due to varying
protocols, priorities, and bureaucratic hurdles. Article 12 highlights the
inadmissibility of bureaucratic formalism:

“Administrative bodies are prohibited from burdening
interested persons with duties, denying them rights or restricting their rights
in any other way for the sole purpose of complying with formal rules and
requirements”.[3]

In practice, however, bureaucratic
tendencies can be deeply ingrained, leading to unnecessary delays and obstacles
in administrative procedures. While Article 14 promotes the “one-stop-shop”
principle for efficiency stating that

“In cases where the administrative body for the
implementation of the administrative procedure requires the receipt of
documents and information from other administrative and other bodies,
administrative proceedings are carried out according to the “one-stop shop”
principle, in which the administrative body receives the necessary documents
and information on its own, without the participation of interested parties
through interdepartmental interaction, except as provided by law”.

However, the actual implementation
of this principle can be challenging due to the need for significant
coordination and integration of various administrative services.

Despite the progressive nature of
the Law on Administrative Procedures in Uzbekistan, its implementation stays
largely theoretical, with old administrative practices persisting in practice.
This discrepancy between the legal framework and its practical application has
led to a lack of judicial enforcement, low awareness and compliance among
entrepreneurs and administrative bodies, and continued occurrence of unlawful
administrative acts. As a result, there is a significant negative impact on
business confidence, investment intentions, and job creation, undermining the
state’s policy goals of improving the business environment and investment
attractiveness. Additionally, issues such as disproportionate administrative
measures, questionable legitimacy of control measures, and inadequate
implementation of the principle of proportionality further exacerbate the
problem. These challenges highlight the need for a unified legal system in the
field of administrative procedures in Uzbekistan to ensure effective governance,
transparency, and the protection of citizens’ and businesses’ rights.

The most disturbing problem in the field
of administrative procedures in Uzbekistan is the significant gap between the
legislative framework and its practical implementation. This issue primarily
stems from the resistance of administrative bodies to adopting new practices
mandated by the law, combined with insufficient training for legal staff. As a
result, many administrative bodies continue to rely on outdated procedures,
which leads to a lack of judicial enforcement and a persistent disconnection
between the legislative intentions and actual administrative practices. These
challenges significantly hinder the effectiveness of the Law on Administrative
Procedures, undermining its intended benefits of ensuring fairness,
transparency, and efficient governance.

Research question and thesis statement

Numerous legislative efforts and
reforms have been undertaken in Uzbekistan to establish a unified legal system
of administrative procedures aimed at improving efficiency, transparency, and
legal compliance in governance. Despite these efforts, practical challenges
such as inconsistent application, bureaucratic resistance, and limited
enforcement continue to undermine the effectiveness of these reforms. This
discrepancy between the legislative intent and its real-world application
presents a critical area for analysis and improvement. Accordingly, this research
sets out to explore the following research questions:

1. How effective is the current
unified legal system of administrative procedures in Uzbekistan in enhancing
governance and legal compliance?

2. What are the main challenges
and barriers to the effective implementation of administrative procedures under
the current legal framework?

3. What strategies can be
adopted to improve the effectiveness of the unified legal system of
administrative procedures in Uzbekistan?

This research examines the
effectiveness of Uzbekistan’s unified legal system of administrative
procedures, comparing it with models from post-Soviet and economically
developed countries to identify best practices and challenges. It argues that
despite the legislative foundation provided by the Law “On Administrative
Procedures”, persistent issues in practical application and enforcement
hinder its efficacy. By analyzing historical developments, current legal
frameworks, and the impact of foreign administrative practices, this research
proposes targeted reforms aimed at overcoming implementation barriers,
enhancing transparency, and safeguarding the rights and interests of
stakeholders, thereby improving governance and administrative accountability in
Uzbekistan.

Research map

This research consists of an
introduction, three chapters and a conclusion, which focus on examining the
significance and evolution of the administrative procedures within a unified
legal framework in Uzbekistan, comparison with post-Soviet and developed
countries, and recommending reforms based on identified legal factors.

Chapter I explores the background
and overview of the administrative procedures in Uzbekistan. It first delves
into the historical development and recent reforms to understand the evolution
and current state of these procedures. This section sets the stage by outlining
the trajectory of administrative legal reforms and their impact on governance.
The chapter then transitions to a discussion on the current legal framework
governing administrative procedures, highlighting its structure, scope, and
effectiveness in addressing administrative needs.

Chapter II conducts a comparative
analysis of administrative procedures between selected countries, divided into
post-Soviet countries(Georgia and Kazakhstan) and economically developed countries(Japan and Germany). This chapter aims
to identify and analyze different models of administrative procedures and their
effectiveness, providing a broader context within which Uzbekistan’s system can
be evaluated. It assesses similarities and differences, extracting relevant
aspects that could influence or enhance Uzbekistan’s administrative procedures.

Chapter III addresses the legal
factors crucial for the reformation of administrative procedures in Uzbekistan
and proposes recommendations. It evaluates the applicability of foreign
practices identified in the previous chapter to the Uzbek context, taking into
account legal, social, and economic environments. It discusses the legal
barriers to reform and offers tailored recommendations for overcoming these
challenges, including potential legislative changes and strategic initiatives
for implementation.