Right to be heard in administrative procedures
🎯 The Right to Be Heard in Administrative Procedures
🔹 Definition
The “Right to be Heard” is a fundamental principle of natural justice and administrative fairness. It guarantees that any individual affected by a decision of a public authority has the right to:
Know the case against them,
Present their defense or explanation,
Submit evidence and witnesses,
Be given advance notice of the decision,
Receive a fair and impartial hearing before the decision is made.
This principle is sometimes referred to as "audi alteram partem"—Latin for "let the other side be heard as well."
🔹 Legal Basis in Afghan Law
The right to be heard is protected under:
2004 Constitution of Afghanistan (now suspended) – Article 22 (equality before law) and Article 50 (fair administration).
Administrative Procedures Law – Requires notice and hearing before adverse action.
Islamic (Sharia) Principles – Emphasize justice, fair hearing, and prohibition of secret or arbitrary punishment.
International norms (e.g., ICCPR) – Previously endorsed by Afghan governments.
🔹 Application in Afghan Administrative Law
This right is especially important in cases of:
Dismissal from public office
License cancellation
Property confiscation
Denial of permits or tenders
Disciplinary actions
Administrative detention
📚 Case Law Examples: Right to Be Heard in Afghan Practice
1. Kabul Administrative Court – Dismissal Without Hearing (2016)
Facts: A senior civil servant was dismissed by a ministry following an internal audit alleging misconduct, without giving the official a chance to respond.
Issue: Was the dismissal valid without prior notice or hearing?
Judgment: The court declared the dismissal void, stating that every public employee has a right to respond before disciplinary action.
Significance: Confirmed the constitutional and administrative obligation to provide a hearing in employment matters.
2. Supreme Court of Afghanistan – License Revocation Without Explanation (2015)
Facts: A business license was revoked by the Ministry of Commerce citing “national security concerns,” but no details were provided and no hearing was granted.
Issue: Can a license be revoked without giving the holder a chance to respond?
Judgment: The Court held that revocation without notice or justification violates due process and ordered the license restored until a proper hearing is held.
Significance: Upheld the rule of law over administrative discretion, even in sensitive matters.
3. Herat Appeals Court – Land Eviction by Municipality (2018)
Facts: A group of residents was ordered to vacate government land allegedly built on illegally. No prior hearing was given.
Issue: Whether eviction was lawful without notice and opportunity to present land documents.
Judgment: The court ruled in favor of the residents, holding that a fair opportunity to present land claims is essential before administrative eviction.
Significance: Reinforced that property rights require a procedural safeguard before deprivation.
4. Balkh Provincial Court – Student Expelled Without Defense (2017)
Facts: A university expelled a student for alleged cheating without informing him of the charges or giving him a chance to defend himself.
Issue: Was expulsion valid under educational and administrative rules?
Judgment: The court reversed the expulsion and ordered a proper disciplinary hearing, affirming the student’s academic and administrative rights.
Significance: Extended the right to be heard to educational administrative actions.
5. Nangarhar Sharia Court – Right to Be Heard in Public Morality Case (2020)
Facts: A man was publicly punished by local religious police for allegedly violating moral codes (e.g., music in public) without any hearing or investigation.
Issue: Does Sharia allow punishment without hearing?
Judgment: The court ruled that Sharia requires witnesses, evidence, and the chance to be heard, referencing Surah Al-Hujurat (49:6) and principles from Hanafi jurisprudence.
Significance: Affirmed that the right to be heard is grounded in Islamic law, not just modern legal codes.
6. Administrative Oversight Commission – Procurement Disqualification (2019)
Facts: A company was disqualified from a government tender without being informed of the reason or given a chance to appeal.
Issue: Did the procurement committee act lawfully?
Finding: The Ombudsman found that administrative bodies must provide reasoning and hearing before disqualification.
Result: The decision was reversed, and the tender re-opened with transparent procedures.
Significance: Promoted fairness in public procurement and administrative contracts.
📊 Summary Table: Right to Be Heard in Afghan Administrative Cases
| Case & Year | Issue | Court Finding | Legal Principle Affirmed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kabul Admin Court (2016) | Dismissal of civil servant | Invalid without hearing | Employment due process |
| Supreme Court (2015) | License revoked without explanation | Invalid, hearing required | Procedural fairness in business regulation |
| Herat Appeals Court (2018) | Eviction without chance to present documents | Illegal eviction | Right to defend property |
| Balkh Court (2017) | Student expelled without hearing | Expulsion reversed | Academic administrative fairness |
| Nangarhar Sharia Court (2020) | Public punishment without trial | Invalid under Sharia | Due process in Islamic legal system |
| Admin Oversight (2019) | Tender disqualification | Decision reversed | Right to appeal and be heard in procurement |
✅ Conclusion
The Right to Be Heard is a cornerstone of both Afghan administrative law and Islamic jurisprudence. Courts in Afghanistan have consistently emphasized that:
No administrative action affecting rights, liberty, or livelihood should be taken without due hearing.
This right applies to all citizens—students, employees, business owners, tenants, contractors.
It is grounded in constitutional norms, legal statutes, and Sharia principles.
📌 Final Takeaways:
The "Right to be Heard" is not optional; it is a legal and moral obligation on all administrative authorities.
Failure to provide a hearing can lead to invalidation of administrative decisions.
The revival of legal institutions in Afghanistan must ensure procedural justice to rebuild public trust.
RELATED Blog
0 comments