Administrative Activity and it‘s Control: Comparative Analysis

Abstract

This thesis explores the comparative legal frameworks of administrative oversight in Ukraine and the United States, with a specific focus on judicial review as a mechanism for ensuring accountability in public administration. It analyzes key doctrinal principles—such as legality, proportionality, transparency, and accountability—and traces their implementation in both legal systems. Through the comparative lens, the study investigates how U.S. doctrines like the “arbitrary and capricious” standard, preliminary injunctions, and structured standing rules can inform institutional reforms in Ukraine. Drawing on a combination of legal texts, case law, and scholarly commentary, the thesis reveals the strengths and limitations of each model and proposes a context-sensitive adaptation of selected U.S. mechanisms to strengthen Ukraine’s administrative justice system, particularly in the context of post-war reconstruction and EU integration. The work contributes to the broader scholarship on public law reform in transitional democracies by offering both conceptual insights and practical recommendations.