Vom Widerspruch zum informalen Beschwerdemanagement. Siegt der “Verhandlungsstaat“ über den “hoheitlichen Anordnungsstaat“?

Abstract

In the context of modernising the administration, and despite of severe scholarly criticism, many German States have abolished on a large scale the redress procedure (“Widerspruchs-” or “Vorverfahren”). The abolition is justified by the alleged failure – partial or total – of the redress procedure. Abolition, thus, seems to be a necessary reform and a characteristic of a modern administration. Preliminary empirical evaluations now enable us to assess carefully the consequences of the abolition. At the same time, the results allow us to draw conclusions regarding the effects and functions of the redress procedure. Administrative practise has revealed compensatory mechanisms that have developed to replace the (abolished) redress procedure in order to achieve the same effects through alternative methods of communication with the citizens. The supporters of the abolition enthusiastically hail these replacement mechanisms as a contribution towards a citizen-friendly management. To examine this assessment, this article summarises the practical effects of the procedural reduction. A typical feature of the observed administrative practises is their informality. Informalisation is to be reviewed sceptically because of its potential to discriminate as well as for its tendency to re-formalise.