Abstract

This article analyses jurisdiction regarding administrative proceedings (lawsuits) in Jordan and France. Moreover, it also discusses the fact that jurisdiction regulates two matters of the utmost importance: the distribution of jurisdiction between ordinary and administrative jurisdictions and the distribution of jurisdiction between administrative jurisdictions themselves in States whose jurisdiction in administrative proceedings is distributed to more than one administrative organ. Moving on, this research was conducted using several research approaches such as, the comparative and analytical approach. The research concluded with a number of conclusions and recommendations, the most important of which was the establishment of an Administrative Proceedings Management Service (APMS), as did the French Administrative Judicial Code, in which attendance was compulsory. To add on, the office of the Administrative Proceedings Administration must have a judge of its own, which corresponds to the post of the judge in the French Administrative Court. The judge will handle the completion of the data regarding both lawsuit parties, and request the documents needed for the case at hand. With that being said, the Jordanian Constitutional Court must reverse its interpretative decision, stating that the administrative justice is part of the ordinary judiciary—in referral to The Constitutional Court’s interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution, which considered the administrative judiciary as an integral part of the ordinary judiciary. Lastly, the research concluded that The French Administrative Judiciary must be taken into consideration regarding the establishment of an administrative judiciary independent from all aspects of the ordinary judiciary, and the explicit introduction of the dual judicial system.