Remedies for Defective Administrative Orders Relating to Unlawful Academic Position Determination Process

Abstract

This article aims to 1) compare and analyze the concepts of defectiveness of administrative orders based on the law in Thailand, Germany, and France and 2) study the regulations to remedy the defective administrative orders regarding the unlawful appointment of academic position. This qualitative research studied legal documents. The results showed that a defective administrative order was regarded as the type with a serious and distinct error. The defective administrative order was an order which had the defectiveness of the judicial consideration procedure, which is not the errors in the contents of the order itself. A defective administrative order which does not possess the adequate characteristics of an administrative order is an order with a grave error. In this case, the officials who are involved in the issuance of the order may be able to correct the errors, but the law on administrative procedures in Thailand is not distinctly enforced. Results of the study on the remedy regulations on the defective administrative order regarding the unlawful appointment of academic position found that the defective administrative order was the order with a defect on an appointment consideration procedure which is still in effect. To remedy this, a redoing of the consideration procedure is needed to be arranged. This is related to Thai law that an administrative order can be reconsidered if it is the errors caused by the consideration procedure and it is not a defect in the content of the order. In German law, they preceded the belief in good faith in the existence of administrative orders. In French law, the government can change the defective administrative order at any time, except in some cases that were prohibited by law, when the remedy policy should be applied by appointing a committee to conduct a new consideration procedure to make the administrative order legal.