The assessment of administrative activity from judicial review: A comparison between territorial levels of the Administration

Abstract

The present study compares the performance of different territorial levels of the Spanish public administration based on a review of their activity by the courts of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. The application of a logistic regression model to 2,363 judgments from the contentious- administrative courts during the period of February 2019 to February 2020 enables an analysis of the influence that factors related to both administrative organization and public management (territorial level of the administration, material sector, or express or presumed character of the challenged act) and the characteristics of the judicial review process itself (type of appellant, sentencing court) have on the judicial review of administrative activity. The results suggest a higher rate of challenge to administrative activity in the case of the General State Administration, although judicial review of administrative action occurs more frequently in acts adopted by local and regional level bodies. Behind these differences lies the greater frequency of presumed acts (administrative silence) at these levels and the complexity of the regulatory framework in matters relating to taxation, public contracting, and employment of personnel serving the Administration. These results justify the utility of empirical analysis based on judicial review processes to complement studies on the evaluation of the performance of public administrations and to identify those areas where the effectiveness of the public administration can be improved.