The Role of the Administrative Judge in Establishing Judicial Certainty: A Substantial, Analytical, and Comparative Study

Abstract

The administrative judge cannot adjudicate the administrative proceedings by a fair judgement unless he has reached a judicial certainty to which he is first satisfied and to which everyone is satisfied, secondly, through evidence and the procedure followed in drawing them. The relationship between the certainty of the administrative judge and the truth is complementary. The truth is the judge's stray and can only be reached in the realization of mental and mental abilities and a painstaking effort through which he seeks to clarify the ambiguity surrounding them.

The study was divided into two sections: the first dealt with judicial certainty, and the second dealt with guarantees of judicial certainty in the administrative judge's jurisprudence. The study aimed to demonstrate the role of Jordan's administrative judge in establishing judicial certainty compared to that of the administrative judge in Germany and Egypt in this area.

The study concluded that the judicial certainty of the administrative judge was a rational certainty resulting from rigorous and objective intellectual processes in the extraction of the evidence, which is of a mixed nature and blends personal and objective criteria. The group's conviction is a basis for accepting the judge's conviction. The study and the importance of the idea recommended that it be enshrined in explicit texts at the heart of the constitutional documents in Germany, Egypt and Jordan.