Definition legal categories "public authority", "public administration" and "public administrating" in the modern doctrine of administrative law

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine

Leonid Yuzkov Khmelnytsky University of Management and Law

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Definition legal categories “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating” in the modern doctrine of administrative law

Oleksandr M. Bukhanevych Department of Constitutional, Administrative and Financial Law

Alla M. Ivanovska Department of Constitutional, Administrative and Financial Law

Vyacheslav A. Kyrylenko Department of state management

Kharkiv, Ukraine

Анотація

Олександр Миколайович Буханевич

Національна академія правових наук України

Алла Миколаївна Івановська

Кафедра конституційного, адміністративного та фінансового права Хмельницький університет управління та права імені Леоніда Юзькова

В'ячеслав Анатолійович Кириленко

Кафедра державного управління Київський Національний університет імені Тараса Шевченка Київ, Україна

ВИЗНАЧЕННЯ ПРАВОВИХ КАТЕГОРІЙ «ПУБЛІЧНА ВЛАДА», «ПУБЛІЧНА АДМІНІСТРАЦІЯ» ТА «ПУБЛІЧНЕ АДМІНІСТРУВАННЯ» В СУЧАСНІЙ ДОКТРИНІ АДМІНІСТРАТИВНОГО ПРАВА

У статті досліджується сутність публічної влади, публічної адміністрації та публічного адміністрування як правових категорій, визначається їх співвідношення як основи для формування оптимальної моделі реалізації публічної влади в Україні відповідно до демократичних принципів державотворення, що є актуальним і сучасних умовах, враховуючи необхідність приведення організації роботи органів публічної влади до європейських стандартів у світлі євроінтеграційних прагнень України, її переходу до європейської цивілізаційної моделі функціонування публічно-правових інститутів. Метою цього дослідження було проаналізувати сутність понять «публічна влада», «публічна адміністрація» та «публічне адміністрування», а також дослідити співвідношення цих правових категорій у сучасній адміністративно-правовій доктрині. Для досягнення цієї мети у дослідженні були використані загальнофілософські, загальнонаукові методи наукового пізнання (діалектичний, аналізу, абстракції, системний), конкретні методи наукового пізнання (порівняльно- правовий (компаративний), історико-правовий), а також спеціально-юридичні методи (формально-правовий, системно-структурний, діяльнісний). У результаті проведеного дослідження сутності правових категорій «публічна влада», «публічна адміністрація» та «публічне адміністрування» запропоновано власні дефініції цих правових категорій і зроблено висновок, що категорія «публічна адміністрація» визначає, яким чином будується публічна влада, які суб'єкти наділені повноваженнями щодо її реалізації, тоді як категорія «публічне адміністрування» відображає змістовну частину публічної влади, тобто форми та порядок її реалізації

Ключові слова: види публічної влади, концепції сутності публічної адміністрації, здійснення публічного адміністрування, публічний інтерес, суб'єкти публічної влади, реалізація публічної влади

Abstract

The article examines the essence of public authority, public administration and public administrating as legal categories, defines their relationship as a basis for forming an optimal model of public authority in Ukraine in accordance with democratic principles of state formation, which is relevant in modern conditions, given the need to bring the organization of public authorities to European standards in light of Ukraine's European integration aspirations, its transition to a European civilizational model of public law institutions. The purpose of this study was to analyse the essence of the concepts of “public authority", “public administration" and “public administrating", and to investigate the relationship between these legal categories in modern administrative law. To achieve this goal, the study used general philosophical, general scientific methods of scientific knowledge (dialectical, analysis, abstraction, system), specific methods of scientific knowledge (comparative law (comparative), historical law), and special legal methods formal legal, system-structural, activity). As a result of the study of the essence of the legal categories “public authority ", “public administration " and “public administrating" proposed their own definitions of these legal categories and concluded that the category “public administration " determines how to build public authority, which entities are endowed powers for its implementation, while the category of “public administrating" reflects the substantive part ofpublic authority, i.e. the form and procedure for its implementation

Keywords: types ofpublic power, concepts of essence ofpublic administration, implementation ofpublic administration, public interest, subjects of public power, realisation of public power

Introduction

Ukraine's path to the European community, its transition to the European civilisation model of public law institutions, the ongoing reform processes encourage the reconsideration of the role of the state in regulating and implementing social relations, forming a politically organised society, building a legal, democratic European state, in which the person, his life and health, inviolability and security are recognised as the highest social value and citizens can freely and actively participate in public law matters. This requires a review of the relationship between the state and citizens, improving the organisation of public authorities, bringing it to European standards.

For the first time, the need to reform the system of public power was identified in the Concept of Administrative Reform in Ukraine, which was approved by the Decree of the President of Ukraine in 1998 [1]. However, this Concept had a number of shortcomings, in particular, it did not contain clear provisions on the division of powers between executive bodies vertically, did not enshrine the need for transparency in their decision-making processes, and therefore did not become a conceptual framework for solving all problems.

During 1999-2013, several projects were developed concepts of reforming public authorities, which provided for different options for the territorial organisation of public authorities and the principles of relations between such bodies on a horizontal and vertical basis. In particular, the main directions of public administration reform were set out quite clearly in the Concept of Public Administration Reform, which, in fact, officially used the term “public administration” [2]. Since 2015, the Ukrainian Parliament and the Government, with the participation of Ukrainian and European experts, have adopted a number of regulations aimed at intensifying public administration reform in Ukraine. Such acts include the new Law on Civil Service [3] and bylaws aimed at its implementation, the Concept of the introduction of positions of reform specialists [4]; the concept of optimising the system of central executive bodies [5].

The importance of adopting the Public Administration Reform Strategy until 2021 should be pointed out separately [6]. This Strategy has been developed in accordance with European standards of good administration on the transformation of the system of public administration [6]. In addition, on July 21, 2021, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine adopted an order “Some issues of public administration reform in Ukraine”, which approved the Strategy for Public Administration Reform of Ukraine for 2022 -2025 and approved an action plan for its implementation. The main goal of this Strategy is to build in Ukraine a capable service and digital state that protects the interests of citizens based on European standards and experience [7]. Important areas of public reform in Ukraine are also identified in the Council of Europe's Action Plans for Ukraine, which have been implemented since 2005. The Council of Europe Action Plan for Ukraine for 20182021 is currently in force [8], which has been extended until the end of 2022.

Thus, modern Ukrainian administrative law is characterised not only by the adoption of new regulations, but also the introduction into legal circulation of new categories that are inherent in the administrative law of the European standard. The concept of “public authority” is becoming more common, and the concept of “public administration” is being replaced by the concept of “public administration” and “public administration” in administrative law doctrine and practice. Of course, these terms are interrelated. However, the question arises: how identical is their content?

In the Western administrative and legal doctrine, a large number of scholars have paid attention to the organization and exercise of public power, the essence of the concepts of “public administration” and “publ ic administration”. In particular T.B. J0rgensen, B. Bozeman analyzed the legal and social nature of the public interest [9, p. 356-357]; P. Panagiotopoulos, B. Klievink, A. Cordella studied the issues of public interest in the functioning of digital government [10]; J. Alford, K. Geuijen, S. Douglas, P. Hart devoted his research to the analysis of the essence of public administration and the role of individual subjects of public administration in government [11, p. 8]; C. Conteh, B. Harding, A. Pirannejad, M. Janssen, J. Rezaei studied the issue of ensuring the public interest at different levels of public administration [12, p. 5; 13]; The works of L. Kuitert are devoted to the problems of public administration in certain spheres of state and public life. L. Kuitert, Volker, M. Hermans, S. Douglas, A. Meijer, I. Criado, R. Gil-Garcia [14, p. 260-261; 15, p. 947-949; 16, p. 440]; M.B.S. Bojang in his research, focused on the problems of public administration in the public sector, analysis of the relationship between “public authority” and “state authority” [17, p. 5]. The work of these scholars is dominated by the principle of human-centeredness and mostly analyzes the issues of public values in public administration, considers the problems of public authority from the standpoint of public interests, while issues that are the subject of this study are touched upon only briefly.

In Ukrainian administrative and legal science to the problem essence of the categories “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating” many scientists also turned their attention to scientific research. For instance, V. Averianov analysed the essence of state power as a type of public power [18, p. 1-14]. A. Bukhanevych emphasised the role of public administration in the implementation of public control in civil society [19, p. 47-49]. O. Lialiuk defined the concept of public power and the main elements of its implementation [20, p. 84]. The work of T. Carabin is devoted to the issue of the powers of public administration [21, p. 8]. T. Carabin [21, p. 8]. S. Kovalchuk investigated the problems of defining the concept of public authority in the theory of state and law [22, p. 50-51]. V. Kolpakov paid considerable attention to the analysis of the legal nature of public administration [23, p. 28-31; 24, p. 13, 14], the analysis of the essence of public administration is devoted to the work of V. Malynovskyi, who defined the content of this category as a set of state and non-state subjects of public power [25, p. 168-169; 26, p. 18], and R. Melnyk [27, p. 125], I. Paterylo [28, p. 84] and A. Prykhodko [29, p. 71-73]. E. Taran thoroughly analysed the problems of the relationship between the concepts of “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating” in the modern conditions of state and legal development of Ukraine [30, p. 34 -35]. However, the subject of research of Ukrainian jurists were mainly some issues of organisation and implementation of public authority, the nature and structure of public administration, understanding the content of public administrating. While systematic analysis of the relationship between these legal categories in the Ukrainian legal doctrine was not paid attention.

That is why the purpose of the article is analysis of the essence of the concepts of “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating”, and the study of the relationship of these legal categories in modern administrative and legal doctrine.

Materials and methods

The methodological basis for the study was system of methods of scientific cognition, including general philosophical, general scientific methods (dialectical, analysis, abstraction, system), specific methods of scientific cognition used in many branches of science (comparative law (comparative), historical law), and special legal methods (formal-legal, system-structural, activity), etc. General philosophical methods of cognition were used by the authors of this study at all stages of the cognitive process. The dialectical method was used in the analysis of doctrinal approaches to the definition of “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating”.

The use of the method of analysis in the study helped to determine the characteristics of public authority, analytical interpretation allowed to identify the components of this concept, which are state power, local government and direct democracy. In particular, to substantiate the thesis that, despite the presence of many common features between state and public authorities, the subjective composition of the latter is much broader. Using the method of abstraction, the authors define the categories of “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating”, bas ed on the doctrinal achievements of legal scholars to draw a general conclusion about the characteristics of each of these concepts.

The systematic method was used in the analysis of the essence of public authority, its individual elements. Means of a systematic approach have become an important component of the general methodological basis of the study and contributed to a deep understanding of the structural and functional content of public power, the relationship of its components, namely state power, direct democracy and local self-government, which are designed to promote the public interest, and also allowed to define public power as the ability of individuals and legal entities, bodies and officials to influence public and public policy issues.

The comparative legal (comparative) method was used in the research process. This method was used in the analysis of doctrinal approaches to the concept of public administration and public administration in Western and Ukrainian administrative and legal doctrines, in particular, on organizational and functional concepts of public administration, identifying differences in approaches of foreign and Ukrainian scholars to understand public administration. The historical method of cognition was used by the authors in highlighting the chronological sequence of development of the legal framework for reforming the organization and implementation of public authorities in Ukraine. This identified the absence of the terms “public administration” and “public administration” in national legal acts, in contrast to foreign legislation, which helped to substantiate the relevance of the research topic. The method of formal logic became the basis for constructing their own definitions of the studied categories, i.e. in giving their own definitions of public authority, public administration and public administration, and the implementation of the substantive characteristics of these administrative and legal institutions.

Special legal methods were also used, in particular, formal-legal and system-structural methods were used in the development and research of the terminology of this article, namely in the study of the content of the categories “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating” definition of the specified legal categories. In the context of application of the activity method in the research the phenomenon of public administration is determined, which is related to its functional orientation and reflects the substantive part of public power, i.e. the form and procedure of its implementation. This approach to methodology allowed to present the author's vision of the essence of public authority, to define its components, to analyse doctrinal approaches to understanding the essence of “public administration” and “public administrating”, to distinguish these legal categories, to obtain scientifically sound results, to make reasonable and effective conclusions on the relationship between the concepts of “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating” in the modern doctrine of administrative law.

The source base of the study was the work of scholars in the field of administrative law and public administration, which highlight the content and features of the concepts of “public authorit y”, “public administration” and “public administrating”.

Results and discussion

1. Concepts and types of public authority

The organised functioning of society is ensured by the government. Thus, methods and forms of realisation of such power, its sources can be various. In the case where the source of power is the people, such power is by its origin public, i.e. public. The public nature of such power is manifested in the fact that the very ability to dominate is the result of the consolidation of individual powers of each member of society and their transfer to a new public entity. By creating a public entity, society determines the subject of its jurisdiction and transfers to it part of its powers to address these issues. Thus, by its nature, public authority is derived from the will of each person - a member of an organised community. In this case, a person is simultaneously in two aspects: on the one hand, as part of the source of public power, the entity that delegates its powers; and on the other - as an object to which public power will later be directed [31, p. 8].

It should be noted that, despite the fact that the concept of public authority is well established in the legal conceptual apparatus, but it is rarely analysed in the scientific literature and therefore today, unfortunately, in administrative law doctrine there is no single approach to the essence and content of this category. In the Legal Encyclopedia, public power is defined as socio-political power, democracy, and its main types are, respectively - the power of the people as direct democracy, direct democracy (elections, referendums, etc.); state power (legislative, executive, judicial); local self-government - local public authority exercised, in particular, by territorial communities, representative bodies of local self-government (councils), executive bodies of councils, village, settlement and city mayors, etc. [32]. public authority legal democratic

Some scholars emphasize the relationship of public authority with the concept of democracy, giving a fairly generalised definition. In particular, O. Lialiuk defines public power as a kind of power in the state, which is focused on managing all state infrastructure, implemented mainly through a specially created apparatus of government, considering the interests of the vast majority of the population, emphasising that such power is aimed at meeting the needs of economically dominant class [20, p. 84].

The definition given by S. Kovalchuk most accurately reflects all the essential characteristics of public power, who considers public power as a kind of socio-political, sovereign, legitimate power, which is based on public interest and impersonal nature, expressed in the system of public, public-political, volitional relations that arise between bodies and officials of the state (endowed authorities), individuals and legal entities, which are mostly subjects of civil society (who delegate their powers first) based on public law and law [22, p. 51]. That is, the concept of public authority is closely intertwined with the concept of public law, the purpose of which is to satisfy the public interest, which, according to S. Kovalchuk, is aimed at solving social, sociopolitical and volitional relations [22, p. 50]. In fact, the public interest is the basis for the activities of public authorities, so on the basis of this feature can determine the characteristics of individual public authorities, the main among which is the state, which, accordingly, implements state power as a kind of public authority. Therefore, the state interest can be considered only one of the elements of public interest [33, p. 141].

The concept of public power is often associated with state power. However, these concepts are not equivalent. As for the concept of state power, the Legal Encyclopedia defines state power as a type of public power exercised by the state and its bodies, the ability of the state to subordinate the behaviour and activities of people and associations in its territory to their will, i.e. power “organisation of the dominant part of the population, which (organisation), ensuring the integrity and security of society, manages it in the interests of this part of it and organises the satisfaction of social needs” [32].

Some scholars consider state power as a system of state powers of its bodies and officials. Thus, according to R. Pohorilko, state power is the will of the state, its bodies and officials to exercise their functions and powers by adopting legal acts within the limits and in the manner prescribed by the Constitution and laws of Ukraine [34, p. 9]. V. Averianov pointed out that the essence of state power is the ability of the “state to make binding decisions and enforce them” [18, p. 12].

Thus, state power is the realisation of the will of the state, which is expressed in the legally defined powers of state bodies and their officials aimed at implementing the tasks and functions of the state, ensuring stability and development of society and protection of human and civil rights and freedoms [35, with. 162].

As rightly noted by O. Halus, state power in form and content is always public power, but public power is not always exercised only by the state. It can also be implemented by other elements of civil society (people or part of it, territorial community, political parties, public organizations, etc.). Thus, public power is a broader concept than state power, because it is exercised by a wider range of subjects [36, p. 294; 37, p. 24]. After analysing the provisions of Art. 5 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which uses the term “power” and not “state power”, meaning public power in general, the author concludes that it enshrines such types of public power as direct democracy, state and municipal power [37, p. 29].

This position is expressed by S. Kovalchuk, pointing out that the system of public authorities is a set of authorities of the people, which have different forms of exercising this power, in particular, these are representative bodies formed by elections, namely parliament, president, local governments. Each public authority is created to implement the goals and programs that ensure the protection of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the people, security of state and society, addressing issues of socio-economic and cultural significance. In this sense, state power is a type of public power through which the powers of the people, the nation are realised and formally reflected in the law [22, p. 48-49].

So, despite the fact that state and public authorities have many common features, but they have many differences, the main of which, as can be seen, is the subject composition, which public authority is much wider than the state. The right to exercise state power has state bodies and officials, while the subjects of public power along with the state and its structural units are also other social institutions, including local government and direct democracy [35, p. 163].

2. Concepts of the essence of public administration

As for the essence of the category “public administration”, it should be emphasised that for the world administrative and legal theory and practice, the concept of “public administration” is one of the basic, key categories used in scientific and educational literature in most countries, namely administrative law has always been considered as a branch of law that regulates the organisation and functioning of public administration, establishes the boundaries of its activities, and establishes the basic forms and procedures for exercising control over such activities. Moreover, in a number of countries the concept of “public administration” is enshrined in law (UK, Spain, Italy, Costa Rica, Mexico, Germany, etc.).

This concept is defined at the international level. Thus, in the UN glossary, the term “public administration” is defined as a centralised organisation of public p olicy and programs, as well as coordination of personnel and has two interrelated meanings: procedures, systems, organisational structures, personnel, etc.), which is financed from the state budget and is responsible for managing and coordinating the work of the executive branch, and its interaction with other stakeholders in the state, society and external relations; management and implementation of the whole set of state measures related to the implementation of laws, decrees and decisions of the government and governing bodies aimed at providing public services [38].

In the doctrine of administrative law of democratic countries of the world, two main concepts of the essence of public administration have been formed:

1) organisational concept, for the conditions of which the decisive characteristic of public administration is its construction as a separate administrative organisation of the state [14, p. 33], the emphasis is on the interpretation of public administration as an administrative organisation of the state and the disclosure of its institutional characteristics. That is, in the subjective sense, public administration is understood as a certain system of administrative bodies and institutions that exercise administrative powers of executive powe r and service functions of the state; in this sense, public administration - a set of entities responsible for the implementation of the administrative function of public authority, including the provision of public services [11, p. 17].

2) functional concept, which is based on the understanding of public administration as a specific function of the state. Under this concept, the term “public administration” is identified with the term “public administrating”, i.e. a specific administrative activity carried out by a statutory system of bodies and institutions endowed with public authority to meet public interests. Thus, the German administrative doctrine uses the term “public administration” in the formal sense in two main meanings: to describe any activity of public administration, regardless of whether it is carried out by the executive or the administrative apparatus that serves the legislature or judiciary; as public administration through administrative procedures that give a legally formal nature of administrative activities and decisions taken during its implementation [16, p. 49-50].

With regard to the interpretation of the category of “public administration” in Ukrainian administrative law, it should be noted that for Ukrainian administrative law theory and practice, this concept is new, as more common in this area is the use of the term “management”. In regulations, the term “public administration” is not used today and is used only at the theoretical level. As rightly noted by B. Bevzenko and R. Melnyk, the emergence of this concept in research is associated with a change in the purpose of administrative law, which in the new realities is formed on the basis of the so-called “human-centric ideology” [27, p. 39].

The positions of Ukrainian scholars on this legal category vary: from the definition of this concept, which is similar to its understanding in Western administrative law, to the reduction of the essence of public administration to the functioning of public authorities at the local level. For example, V. Averianov defined the concept of “public administration” as 1) a set of bodies, institutions and organisations that perform administrative functions; 2) administrative activities carried out by this administration in the interests of society; 3) the sphere of public sector management by the same public administration [18, p. 1-14].

For their part, Yu. Deliia defined the category of “public administration” as a new subject of local government, namely - the system of territorial formations of executive bodies of state executive power on the ground and relevant local governments, their officials elected by communities, empowered to decide local issues independently or through bodies formed by them within the Constitution and laws of Ukraine [39, p. 6]. It is difficult to agree with this position, as limiting the concept of public administration only to local publ ic authorities and their officials is clearly erroneous.

According to V. Bevzenka and R. Melnyk, the form of exercise of legislative power is lawmaking, the judiciary - justice, and the form of executive power is public administrating. This position also significantly narrows the understanding of the essence of public administrating only within the executive branch. At the same time, scholars rightly point out that within the executive branch, along with the implementation of public administrating, political decisions are also implemented, which are the content of political activity that is not part of the public administrating, therefore not regulated by administrative law [27, p. 39-40]. A similar position is held by I. Paterylo, who points out that public administration can sometimes act either as a subject of public administration or as a subject of political activity. This fact, according to the scientist, affects the responsibilities of politicians and civil servants. In addition, the activities of public officials are determined by the rules of administrative law and fall under the jurisdiction of administrative courts in case of their illegality, while the principles of political figures are the rules of constitutional law and, consequently, its result s are often removed from the jurisdiction of the judiciary [28, p. 84].

Quite a significant number of Ukrainian scholars define the content of this category as a set of state and non-state subjects of public power, the key structural elements of which are: a) the executive branch; b) executive bodies of local self-government [25, p. 168-169; 26, p. 18; 40, p. 319; 41, p. 209; 42, p. 13; 43, p. 62].

3. Public administrating: organisational-structural and functional approaches to understanding the legal nature

Some scholars in the field of administrative law and public administration consider the legal nature of public administration through the prism of the category of “public administrating”. Thus, according to V. Kolpakova public administrating is a set of bodies and institutions that exercise public power through compliance with the law, bylaws and other actions in the public interest. The scientist distinguishes two dimensions of this category: functional (the activities of relevant structural entities to perform functions aimed at realising the public interest) and organisational-structural (a set of bodies created for the exercise (realisation) of public power) [23, p. 28-31; 24, c. 13, 14].

However, if we consider the organisational and structural aspect of the understanding of public administration, highlighted by V. Kolpakov, it should be noted that the subjects of public administrating are not only “bodies” that exercise public power, as p ublic power is exercised not only through the exercise of public authority powers, but also through the implementation of various forms of direct democracy. We believe that the content of the category “public administrating”, in addition to public authorities, should also include bodies and structures that are not organizationally part of it, but perform delegated functions of public authorities to pursue public interests in all spheres of society.

In addition, the position of V. Kolpakov's understanding of the essence of public administrating is somewhat controversial. On the one hand, the scientist defines public administrating as a set of bodies, institutions and structures that exercise public power, and on the other - highlighting the functional aspect of this concept, defines it as the activities of relevant structural entities. It should be emphasised that the functional aspect is decisive in characterising the essence of public administrating, as this concept involves the activities of relevant bodies, institutions and structures that exercise public power. Moreover, given the global trends in the institution of public administrating, such activities should be aimed not at achieving certain political goals, strengthening the organisational and regulatory influence of society on society, but to build a model of service state, which aims to serve the interests of citizens and society. Under this model, public administration plays the role of a service tool designed to ensure the public interest, and public administration is based on the principles of feedback between public administration and citizens.

Conclusions

Based on a detailed analysis of scientific approaches to the essence of the concept of “public authority”, it is proposed to interpret this legal category as sovereign, legitimate authority, it is based on the public interest, which is the ability of individuals and legal entities, bodies and officials to influence the solution of social and public policy issues and includes state power, direct democracy and local self-government.

As for the category of “public administration”, despite the fact that in Western administrative law doctrine it is interpreted mostly in organisational (set of entities responsible for the implementation of the administrative function of public authority) and functional (specific administrative activities of the relevant sub-projects to meet public needs) aspects, however, should still distinguish the functional component and allocate it to a separate category - “public administrating”.

The categories of “public administration” and “public administrating” are similar in nature, but different in content independent administrative and legal concepts that characterize the organisation and functioning of public authority. Public administration should be understood as public authorities, and bodies and structures that are not organizationally part of the public authority system, but perform the functions delegated by it to realise public interests in all spheres of society and the state. For its part, public administrating is the activity of public administration represented by public authorities, bodies and structures that are not organisationally part of the public authority system, but perform delegated functions to realie public interests in all spheres of society and the state, acting exclusively within the powers and in the manner prescribed by law, in order to ensure the rule of law, human and civil rights and freedoms to meet the needs of society and the state and endowed with the prerogative of public authority. Based on the above approach to the understanding of public administration and public administrating, we can say that the category of “public administration” de termines how public power is built, which entities are empowered to implement it. While the category of “public administrating” reflects the substantive part of public power, i .e. the forms and procedure for its implementation.

This understanding of the nature and relationship of the categories of “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating” can be the basis for construction of a modern concept of these categories in the Ukrainian doctrine of administrative law. The practical implementation of this concept will contribute to the development of an optimal model of public authority, which is based on the principles of the rule of law, human and civil rights and freedoms and generally meets all the criteria of democratic principles of statehood.

Recommendations

The scientific value of the study is that it develops the concept of legal categories “public authority”, “public administration” and “public administrating”, based on the analysis of the content of these concepts and their relationship in the modern doctrine of administrative law. The findings of the study can be used in research work - for further general and special research in the field of law; in law-making - in the process of development and improvement of the legal framework in the field of organisation and implementation of public authority, in order to harmonise Ukrainian legislation with world standards; in the educational process - while studying in educational institutions of the legal direction of academic discipline s of general theory of law, constitutional law and administrative law.

References

1. Decree of the President of Ukraine No. 810/98 “On Measures to Implement the Concept of Administrative Reform in Ukraine”. (1998, July). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/810/98#Text.

2. Draft Concept of Public Administration Reform. (2021, December). Retrieved from www.center.gov.ua/docman/download-document.html.

3. Law of Ukraine No. 889-VIII “On Public Service”. (2015, December). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/889-19#Text.

4. Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 905-r “On Approval of the Concept of Introduction of Specialists' Positions on Reform Issues”. (2016, November). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/905-2016-%D1%80#Text.

5. Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 1013-r “On Approval of the Concept of Optimization of the System of Central Executive Bodies”. (2017, December). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1013-2017-%D1%80#Text.

6. Approved by the Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No.474 “Strategy for Public Administration Reform until 2021”. (2016, June). (As amended by the order of No. 1102-R. (2018, December)). Retrieved from https://www.kmu.gov.ua/storage/app/sites/1/reform%20office/01_strategy_ukr.pdf

7. The Government has approved the Public Administration Reform Strategy of Ukraine until 2025. Retrieved from https://www.kmu.gov.ua/news/uryad-zatverdiv-strategiyu-reformuvannya-derzhavnogo-upravlinnya- ukrayini-do-2025-roku.

8. Council of Europe Action Plan for Ukraine 2018-2021, approved by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 21 February 2018. Permanent Representation of Ukraine to the Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://coe.mfa.gov.ua/spivrobitnictvo/plani-dij-radi-yevropi-dlya-ukrayini.

9. Jorgensen, T.B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values: An inventory. Administration & Society, 39(3), 354381. doi: 10.1177 / 0095399707300703.

10. Panagiotopoulos, P., Klievink, B., & Cordella A. (2019). Public value creation in digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), article number 101421. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2019.101421.

11. Alford, J., Geuijen, K., Douglas, S., & Hart, P. (2016). Ventures in public value management: Introduction to the symposium. Public Management Review, 19(5). doi: 10.1080/14719037.2016.1192160.

12. Conteh, C., & Harding, B. (2021). Boundary-spanning in public value co-creation through the lens of multilevel governance. Public Management Review. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2021.1942529.

13. Pirannejad, A., Janssen, M., & Rezaei, J. (2019). Towards a balanced e-participation index: Integrating government and society perspectives. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), article number 101404. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2019.101404.

14. Kuitert, L., Volker, L.L., & Hermans, M.H. (2019). Taking on a widwe view: Public value interests of construction clients in a changing construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 37(5), 257-277. doi: 10.1080/01446193.2018.1515496.

15. Douglas, S., & Meijer, A. (2016). Transparency and public value - Analyzing the transparency practices and value creation of public utilities. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(12), 940-951. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2015.1064133.

16. Criado, I.J., Gil-Garcia, R.J. (2019). Creating public value through smart technologies and strategies: From digital services to artificial intelligence and beyond. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32(5), 438-449. doi: 10.1108/IJPSM-07-2019-0178.

17. Bojang, M.B.S. (2020). Beyond new public management paradigm: The public value paradigm and its implications for public sector managers. Journal of Public Value and Administrative Insight, 3(2). doi: 10.31580/jpvai.v3i2.1381.

18. Averianov, V., & Pukhtetska, A. (2010). European administrative space and the principle of the rule of law. Kyiv: Yuridichna Dumka.

19. Bukhanevych, A. (2010). Public administration as an institution for optimizing public control in civil society. Bulletin of the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, 2, 46-56.

20. Lialiuk, O.Yu. (2012.) State apparatus as an element of the mechanism of realization of public power. State Formation and Local Self-Government, 23, 81-93.

21. Carabin, T.O. (2016). Distribution of powers of public administration. Uzhhorod: Hrazhda.

22. Kovalchuk, S. (2017). The problem of defining the concept of public authority in the theory of state and law. Bulletin of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”. Series: Legal Sciences, 884, 47-51.

23. Kolpakov, V.K. (2003). On public administrations. Law of Ukraine, 5, 28-31.

24. Kolpakov, V.K. (2008). Administrative liability (administrative tort law). Kyiv: Yurinkom-Inter.

25. Malynovskyi, V.Ya. (2005). Dictionary of terms and concepts of public administration. Kyiv: Center for Civil Service Institutional Development.

26. Malynovskyi, V.Ya. (2013). Status and prospects of administrative reform in Ukraine. Scientific Works of the Petro Mohyla Black Sea State University. Series: Political Science, 212(200), 18-22.

27. Melnyk, R.S., & Bevzenko, V.M. (2014). General administrative law. Kyiv: Vaite.

28. Paterylo, I.V. (2014). To understand the essence and content of the category “Public Administration”. Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanitarian University. Series: Jurisprudence, 9-1, 83-85.

29. Prykhodko, A.A. (2019). Definition of “public administration” in the sphere of preventing and combating corruption in Ukraine. Legal Position, 4(25), 69-74.

30. Taran, Ye.I. (2020). Correlation of the concepts of “State Management”, “Public Administration” and “Public Management” in the transformation processes of Ukraine. Scientific Notes of Tavrida National V.I. Vernadsky University. Series: State Administration, 31(70), 2, 33-37.

31. Vershinina, S.I. (2010). The concept of public power and its interaction with state coercion. Vector of Science of Tomsk State Uninversity, 1, 8-11.

32. Shemshuchenko, Yu.S. (Ed.). (1998). Legal encyclopedia: In 6 volumes. Kyiv: Ukrainian Encyclopaedia.

33. Ivanovska, A.M. (2020). To the question of the essence of the concept of “public authority”. In Jurisprudence in the XXI century: Promising and priority areas of research: Abstracts of reports at the international scientific-practical conference (pp. 138-143). Zaporizhzhia: Zaporizhzhia National University.

34. Pohorilko, V.F. (Ed.). (2000). Bodies of state power of Ukraine. Kyiv: Institute of State and Law named after V.M. Koretskyi of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.

35. Ivanovska, A.M. (2021). Constitutional control in the system of state control: Theoretical-legal and praxeological principles (Doctoral dissertation, Institute of Legislation of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine).

36. Halus, O.O. (2018). Direct democracy as a form of public authority. In O.M. Bukhanevych (Ed.), Public authority in Ukraine: Problematic aspects and ways to improve (pp. 294-351). Khmelnytskyi: Khmelnytskyi University of Management and Law.

37. Halus, O.O. (2012). Forms of direct democracy in Ukraine (Doctoral dissertation, Koretsky Institute of State and Law of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine).

38. A glossary of common development terms. (2003). Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/10042632/UNITED_NATIONS_DEVELOPMENT_PROGRAMME_a_glossar y_of_COMMON_development_terms.

39. Deliia, Yu.V. (2014). Administrative and legal aspects of rule-making ofpublic administration in Ukraine (Doctoral thesis, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine).

40. Lazur, Ya, Karabin, T., Martyniuk, O., Bukhanevuch, O., & Kanienberh-Sandul, O. (2020). Ensuring a balance between public and private interests in the implementation of quarantine measures. Revista de Derecho, 9(2), 317-340. doi: 10.31207/ih.v9i2.257.

41. Bryhinets, O.O. (2020). Public value management and new public governance as modern approaches to the development of public administration. Revista San Gregorio, 42, 205-214.

42. Fomin, Yu.V. (2012). Bodies of Internal Affairs of Ukraine in the system of public administration: Administrative and legal principles (Doctoral thesis, Zaporizhzhia National University, Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine).

43. Tsvirkun, Yu.I. (2018). Legal nature and purpose of public administration: generalized historiographic analysis of doctrinal approaches and its modern understanding. Jurnalul JuridicNational: Teorie §i Practicв, 4(32), 1, 57-63.

Размещено на Allbest.ru