Principle of Truth and Free Evaluation of Evidence in Administrative Procedure – Between Normative Formulation and Actual Application
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51738/kpolisa.2026.2r.nzdbAbstract
Administrative procedure is the primary instrument for the exercise and protection of the rights and
obligations of parties in relation to public authorities, while the proper establishment of facts directly affects
the legality and fairness of decision-making. The paper analyzes the principle of truth and the free
evaluation of evidence, with particular emphasis on the relationship between the normative requirement
of fully establishing the facts and the limitations encountered in practice. Special attention is devoted to
the role of administrative authorities in obtaining and evaluating evidence, the rights of the parties,
proportionality, and judicial review. The aim of the paper is to identify the key problems in the application
of these principles and the possibilities for improving administrative practice.
Downloads
References
Hasanbegović, J. (1996). On the Legal Syllogism. Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, 44(2–3), 165–172.
Kelsen, H. (2010). General Theory of Law and State. Faculty of Law, University of Belgrade.
Knežević, M. S. (2016). The Adversarial Principle in Serbian Civil Procedure. Official Gazette.
Lilić, S. (2017). Commentary and critical analysis of the Law on General Administrative Procedure. Official Gazette.
Lilić, S. (2023). Administrative law – administrative procedural law. Faculty of Law University of Belgrade.
Ljubanović, B. (2019). The principle of material truth and administrative procedure. Croatian and Comparative Public Administration, 19(4), 659–675. https://doi.org/10.31297/hkju.19.4.6
Marković, R. (2002). Administrative law: General part (2nd rev. and expanded ed.).
Martinović, A. (2004). The concept of administration in Serbian legal scholarship. IP Justinijan.
Mayer, O. (1895). Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht [German administrative law]. Duncker & Humblot.
Milkov, D. (2017). Administrative law II: Administrative activity (9th rev. and expanded ed.). Faculty of Law University of Novi Sad, Publishing Center.
Milkov, D., & Radošević, R. (2024). Collection of procedural material and burden of proof in administrative proceedings. Proceedings of the Faculty of Law in Novi Sad, 58(3), 517–539. https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfns58-54023
Radošević, R. (2015). Administrative dispute due to administrative silence]. Proceedings of the Faculty of Law in Novi Sad, 49(4), 1971–1986. https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfns49-9458
Rajko, A. (2013). Establishing facts and evidentiary proceedings in administrative disputes. Proceedings of the Faculty of Law, University of Rijeka, 34(1), 495–524.
Legislation
National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia. (2023). Law on General Administrative Procedure. Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, Nos. 18/2016, 95/2018 – authentic interpretation, and 2/2023 – Constitutional Court decision.
Case Law
Administrative Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2019, December 24). Judgment 9-U-16494/2019.
Administrative Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2021, February 11). Judgment Už-16744/2019.
Administrative Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2022, September 15). Judgment Už-13012/2020.
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2017, July 13). Decision Už-8814/2016.
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2017, October 26). Decision Už-3109/2016.
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2022, October 13). Decision Už-7840/2019.
Suominen v. Finland, App. No. 37801/97, European Court of Human Rights (2003, July 1).
Supreme Court of Cassation of the Republic of Serbia. (2020, June 1). Decision Rž1up. 27/2020.
Supreme Court of Cassation of the Republic of Serbia. (2021, May 26). Judgment Uzp. 94/2021.
Supreme Court of the Republic of Serbia. (2024, May 14). Judgment Uzp. 193/2023.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nada Živanović, Dejan Bukazić
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
