The Principle of Natural Justice in Administrative Law

Overview
A fundamental tenet of administrative law is natural justice, which guarantees impartiality in both legal and extralegal processes. Natural justice, which has its roots in common law, protects people’s rights to an impartial trial and verdict, especially when it comes to official government operations. This article explores the fundamentals of natural justice, its importance in administrative law, and its use in administrative tribunals and judicial reviews.

The Fundamental Ideas of Natural Justice
The two main tenets of natural justice are audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causa sua. These two Latin proverbs mean, respectively, “hear the other side” and “no one should be a judge in their own cause.” They serve as the cornerstone of procedural justice when combined.

1.Nemo Judex in Causa Sua:

The Proper Role of No One to Judge Their Own Case
A decision-maker must be unbiased and have no stake in the decision’s result, according to this idea. It shields judicial and administrative judgments from prejudice and conflicts of interest. The possibility of injustice taints the entire process if a decision-maker has a personal stake in the result.The impression of bias is just as much a component of the impartiality principle as real prejudice. The perception of bias can compromise the integrity of the decision-making process, even in cases when the decision-maker is perceived as subjectively neutral. In order to ascertain if bias exists, courts frequently employ the “reasonable suspicion” or “reasonable apprehension” test, which asks if a reasonable person would suspect prejudice under the specific circumstances.

2.Audi Alteram Partem – Listen to the Opposition
A fair chance for anyone impacted by a decision to make their case is mandated by the second principle. This covers the right to know the facts of the case against them, the right to answer to any evidence put out against them, and the right to produce proof in support of their defense.

The right to a fair hearing encompasses not just legal processes but also administrative activities that impact the rights or interests of individuals. By guaranteeing that decisions in administrative law are grounded on a thorough comprehension of all pertinent facts and arguments, this principle lessens the possibility of arbitrary or unfair decisions.

Natural Justice’s Application to Administrative Law
Natural justice concepts are applicable in a variety of administrative contexts, including judgments made by regulators that have an impact on enterprises and disciplinary proceedings in public employment. Depending on the situation and the type of choice being taken, several guidelines may be applied.

1.Court Review
Courts use the process of “judicial review” to determine if administrative body decisions are lawful. A violation of natural justice is one of the reasons for judicial review. A court has the authority to overturn a judgment and mandate a new hearing or review if it determines that the decision violated the natural justice standards.
For example, a company may request judicial review if a regulatory authority fines it without offering it a chance to defend its position. The company may argue that the judgment is against the audi alteram partem concept.

2.Tribunals for Administration
Natural justice concepts also apply to administrative tribunals, which hear cases involving people and governmental authorities. Despite not being courts, these tribunals carry out quasi-judicial duties and are required to make sure that their practices follow fairness standards.

Legislation in several jurisdictions expressly mandates that administrative tribunals uphold natural justice. Nonetheless, courts have found that natural justice principles are inherent in how these tribunals operate even in the lack of such legislative requirements.

Natural Justice Exemptions
Despite being essential, the principles of natural justice may not always apply or may need to be applied in different ways depending on the circumstances. These exclusions are frequently justified by pragmatic grounds or the characteristics of the decision-making procedure.

1.Public Interest and Urgency
The norms of natural justice may be suspended in cases where national security or public safety necessitate rapid action. For instance, in order to protect the public from damage during a public health emergency, authorities may need to act quickly without holding a complete hearing.

2. Statutory Exemptions
Natural justice concepts may occasionally be restricted or excluded by special laws. For example, because of the unique circumstances surrounding their creation, some immigration judgments or emergency laws could not be subject to the full application of natural justice.

3.Revocation of Rights
People are free to renounce their right to a fair trial or an unbiased arbiter. This is frequently the case in contracts where parties consent to a specific dispute resolution procedure that might not entirely follow the principles of natural justice.

Conclusion
In administrative law, the natural justice concept is essential to maintaining accountability and fairness. Natural justice shields people from arbitrary or biased judgments made by public authority by ensuring impartiality and the right to a fair hearing. The concepts of natural justice, which support the rule of law and guarantee that justice is not only done but also seen to be done, continue to be an essential part of legal and administrative processes, notwithstanding certain deviations to this norm.

Contributed By – Sahdev Sharma(Intern)