408 43466 1 PB

‫ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺭﻴﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﹼﺩ ‪ ،35‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪2008 ،2‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‬

‫)ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ(‬
‫ﺨﺎﻟﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻴﺩﻱ*‬
‫ﻤﻠﺨﺹ‬
‫ﺘﻌﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻟﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﺠﺭﺍ ‪‬ﺀ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﹰﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺘﺨﻀﻊ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﻭﺍﻷﺤﻜﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﺸﻌﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺭﻏﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺒﺤﺙ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻤﻬﺎ ﺘﻔﺼﻴﻼﹰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﻤﻭﻗﻑ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻡ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﹰﺎ ﻟﺒﺤﺜﻨﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻭﺯﻋﻨﺎﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺒﺎﺤﺙ ﺃﺭﺒﻌﺔ ﺩﺭﺴﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻭل ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺼﻭﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻓﺭﺩﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻭﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻘﺩﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ ﻟﺒﺤﺙ‬
‫ﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺒﻊ ﻭﺍﻷﺨﻴﺭ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺨﺼﺼﻨﺎﻩ ﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺃﻨﻬﻴﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺒﺨﺎﺘﻤﺔ ﻷﺒﺭﺯ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻭﺼﻠﻨﺎ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ؛ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺩﻋﻭﻨﺎ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺨﺫ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺩﻋﻭﻨﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻴﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﻟﺔ‪ :‬ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻻ ﺘﻘﺘﺼﺭ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻓﺤﺴﺏ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤــﺔ‬

‫ﺒل ﺇﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻤﺘﺩ ﻟﺘﺸﻤل ﺸﺘﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﺎﻤﺔ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺃﻡ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺃﻡ‬
‫ﻓﺭﺩﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻴﺩﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻟﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺒﺤﺜﻨﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﺘﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺴﻭﻑ ﻨﻘﺘﺼﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻜﺈﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﺘﺴﺘﺨﺩﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻬﻭﺽ ﺒﻭﻅﺎﺌﻔﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻓﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﻤﺎ ﺃﺼﺩﺭﺘﻪ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﺴﻡ ﺒﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺘﺴﺎﻋﺩ ﺭﺠل ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ – ﻭﻻ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺤﻅ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻤﻊ ﻜﺜﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺸﻙ – ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﻭﻤﻼﺌﻡ؛ ﻓﻬﻲ ﺘﺯﻭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﺤﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺘﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺤﻅ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻭﻓﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤل ﻤﺎ ﺘﻭﺍﺠﻬﻪ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻜﺘﺒﺘﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻜﻠﻪ ﻭﺭﻏﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﻤﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﻭﺼﻌﻭﺒﺎﺕ ﻓﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻤﻜﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻭل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻀﻭﺀ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺴﺏ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻲ‪ ،‬ﺇﻟﻰ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﺘﻌﺩ ﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺴﺎﺌل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻨﺎ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﺘﻭﺴﻴﻊ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺩﻭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻤﺤﻼ ﻟﻠﺒﺤﺙ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻗﺴﻤﻨﺎﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺒﺎﺤﺙ ﺃﺭﺒﻊ ﺩﺭﺴﻨﺎ‬ ‫)ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺘﻭﺤﺔ(‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺫﻫﺏ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ)‪.(1‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﻭل ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺼﻭﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﺎﻟﺠﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﻋﻼﻭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﻀﻤﺎﻨﺔ ﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺤﻘﻭﻕ ﻭﺤﺭﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭﻩ ﻭﺒﺤﺜﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩﺕ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﻤﺎ ﺸﻬﺩﻩ ﻋﺼﺭﻨﺎ‬
‫ﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺒﻊ ﻓﻘﺩ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺘﺴﺎﻉ ﻨﻁﺎﻕ ﺘﺩﺨﻠﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﺍﺘﺴﻡ ﺒﻪ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻓﺭﺩﻨﺎﻩ ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻨﻬﻴﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﺘﻁﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻘﻨﻴﺔ ﻫﺎﺌﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺒﺤﺜﻨﺎ ﺒﺨﺎﺘﻤﺔ ﻷﺒﺭﺯ ﻤﺎ ﺨﻠﺼﻨﺎ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻨﻭﺍﺡ ﺸﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺘﺠﺴﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺠﻠﻰ ﺼﻭﺭﻩ ﺒﻅﻬﻭﺭ‬
‫)ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﻟﻜﺘﺭﻭﻨﻴﺔ( ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺃﻨﺸﺌﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﻔﻌل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻷﻭل‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻭل‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺘﺴﻌﻰ ﺩﻭل ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﺴﻌﻴﺎ ﺤﺜﻴﺜﺎ‬
‫ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺼﻭﺭﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻨﺤﻭ ﺘﺄﺴﻴﺴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺒل ﺃﻥ ﻨﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻻ ﺒﺩ ﻟﻨﺎ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻤﻬﺎ ﻭﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﻴﺯ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫∗ ﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻭﻕ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻹﺴﺭﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ‪ .‬ﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﺍﺴﺘﻼﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ‪ ،‬ﺜﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻁﺭﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻻ ﺒﺩ ﻟﻨﺎ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ‪ ،2006/8/9‬ﻭﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﻗﺒﻭﻟﻪ ‪.2007/4/15‬‬
‫© ‪ 2008‬ﻋﻤﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ /‬ﺍﳉﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻧﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﲨﻴﻊ ﺍﳊﻘﻮﻕ ﳏﻔﻮﻇﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫‪- 345 -‬‬
‫ﺨﺎﻟﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻴﺩﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ‪...‬‬
‫ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﻬﻴﺩﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﻨﻰ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺼﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻨﻭﺍﻋﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺒﺤﺜﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻁﻠﺒﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺘﻀﻤﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻌﻤل ﺃﻭ ﺍﻻﻤﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﻋﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻪ‬ ‫ﻤﺴﺘﻘﻠﻴﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻻ ﻴﺭﻗﻰ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺼﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ)‪ .(6‬ﻭﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﻋﻁﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺭﻓﻊ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺸﻜﻼ‬ ‫ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺎ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻠﺯﻤﺎ ﺃﻭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻠﺯﻡ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺃﻤﺜﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﻤﺩﻟﻭل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺓ )ﺯ( ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻗﺩ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫)‪ (30‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺁل ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺕ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 17‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 97‬ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﺹ‬ ‫ﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﺼﺩﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻨﺴﺏ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻬﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻴﺸﻭﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻐﻤﻭﺽ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﺘﻘﺘﻀﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻨﺢ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻬﺎﺩﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺃﺼﺩﺭﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل‬ ‫ﻁﺎﺒﻊ ﻓﻨﻲ ﻗﺎﺌﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺏ ﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺒﻬﺎ ﺭﻓﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﻀﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل‬ ‫ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﻬﺎ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭﺓ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎل ﺒﺈﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﺈﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺩﻋﻲ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻼﺩ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ)‪ ،(2‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﻴﻠﺯﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﺼﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺩﻴﺭ ﺍﻷﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺤﺴﺒﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺘﻀﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﺩ ﻁﺭﺡ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻔﺎﺕ ﻋﺩﺓﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻨﺎﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺃﻯ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺘﺎﻥ ‪ 37 ،19‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﻗﺎﻤﺔ ﻭﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻷﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪24‬‬ ‫ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺘﺄﺨﺫ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﻤﻘﺘﻀﺎﻩ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ .(7)1973‬ﻭﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺸﻜﻼ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺎ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺭ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﻨﺘﻘﺩ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﻗﺼﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺨﺫ‬
‫ﻭﺠﺏ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺘﻪ ﻭﺇﻻ ﺒﻁل ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ)‪ ،(8‬ﻭﻗﻀﺕ ﺒﻭﺠﻭﺏ‬ ‫ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺒﺄﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻴﻔﺼﺢ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻋﻥ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻭﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺼﺭﺍﺤﺔ ﻭﺇﻻ ﺒﻁل‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺃﻭ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺃﻭ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﺭﻓﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ)‪.(9‬‬ ‫ﺁﺨﺭﻭﻥ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺒﺄﻥ ﻜﻼ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺜﺎﺒﺘﺔ ﺒﻨﺹ ﺃﻭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺜﺎﺒﺘﺔ ﺒﻨﺹ ﻭﺘﻌﺩ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻴﺘﺸﺎﺒﻬﺎﻥ ﻤﻥ ﻨﻭﺍﺡ ﻋﺩﺓ ﻓﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺒﻤﺜﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺨﺎل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺜﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﺅﺨﺫ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻤﺠﺭﺩ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﻬﻴﺩﻱ ﻴﺴﺒﻕ ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻜﻼﻫﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﺃﻨﻪ ﺨﻠﻁ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ‪ .‬ﻭﺜﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻴﻌﺭﻓﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻴﻤﺜل ﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﻭﺴﻴﻊ ﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ‬ ‫ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻌﺒﻴﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﺭﺩﻱ ﺃﻭ ﺠﻤﺎﻋﻲ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻬﻤﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ‬ ‫ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﻤﻘﺘﻀﻰ ﻨﺹ ﺃﻭ ﺒﺩﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﺨﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻁﺎﺒﻊ ﻓﻨﻲ ﺃﻭ ﻋﻤﻠﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺼﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻨﺹ‪ .‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﺒل ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺅﺨﺫ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺒﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩ ﺃﻭ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ)‪ .(3‬ﻭﺘﺨﺘﻠﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ ﻜﻼ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﺒﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻟﻔﺘﻭﻯ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻴﺩﺨل ﻓﻲ ﻤﻔﻬﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭ)‪ .(4‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻨﻭﻀﺤﻪ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻤﻊ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺜﻤﺔ ﻓﺭﻭﻗﺎ ًﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﻓﻲ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﻴﺯ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ )ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ(‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺭﻯ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻭ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻴﺭﻓﻊ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﺒﻁﻠﺒﻬﺎ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ‬ ‫ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﻹﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺒﺎﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ؛ ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺇﻤﺎ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺏ ﻨﺹ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﺃﻭ ﺒﻤﺒﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺃﻤﺭ ﻴﺩﺨل ﻓﻲ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺃﻭ ﻫﻭ ﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻓﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻜﻭﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ)‪ .(5‬ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺤﺘﻰ ﻤﻥ ﺩﻭﻥ ﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﺒﺭﻓﻊ‬ ‫ﺠﻭﺍﺯﻴﺎ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻻ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ ﺒﻁﻠﺒﻪ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﻫﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﻻ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻭﻁ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻤﻪ ﻭﻟﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺒﻴﺎ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻭﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻟﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺒﺎﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺩ )‪ (2‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺓ )ﺏ( ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (10‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻤﺒﻨﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻴﺼﺒﺢ ﺇﺠﺭﺍ ‪‬ﺀ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﹰﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺤﺼﺎﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﻗﺕ ﺭﻗﻡ )‪ (8‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 2003‬ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻀﻲ‬ ‫ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﹰﺎ ﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﻏﻔﺎﻟﻪ ﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﺯﺨﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻌﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺒﺄﻥ ﺘﺘﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻺﺤﺼﺎﺀﺍﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺎﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻁﻠﻕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‬
‫ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺍﺤﺎﺕ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺎﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻹﺤﺼﺎﺌﻲ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭﻩ ﻭﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ )ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ( ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻌﺭﻓﻪ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ‬
‫‪- 346 -‬‬

‫ﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻻ ﺘﻤﻠﻙ ﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺭﻴﺭ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺴﻴﻜﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﺒﺸﺄﻨﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺜﻡ ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﺩﺍﺌﻤﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺠﻬﺔ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ)‪.(13‬‬ ‫ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﺜﻠﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺃﻭ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﻋﻁﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺠﻬﺔ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺤﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺘﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺈﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺒﺤﺴﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻜﺎﻟﻤﻜﺎﺘﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺒﻴﻭﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﺒﺤﺴﺏ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺩ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫﻩ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻤﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﻥ ﺃﻓﺭﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻨﺎ ‪‬ﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻨﺼﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (141‬ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﻴﺭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻲ ﺭﻗﻡ )‪ (50‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1985‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﻭﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﺸﻜﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺤﺩ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺃﻭ ﺇﺤﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ ﺒﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻜﺎﻨﻭﺍ ﻤﻥ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﺒﻼﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺇﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﺨﺎﺭﺠﻬﺎ ﻟﻼﺸﺘﺭﺍﻙ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺤﻭﺍﺩﺙ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﺌﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﺼﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ)‪ .(14‬ﻓﺎﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ – ﺇﺫﻥ – ﺠﺯﺀ‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﺨﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻴﻘﺩﻡ ﺩﺍﺌﻤﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﺃﻭ ﺇﺤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻀﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺩﻨﻰ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻰ‪ .‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ‬
‫ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺘﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻰ ﻻﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺨﺫ ﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺘﻌﺩ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺠﻬﺔ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﺩﻨﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻟﺏ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﺜﻠﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺒﻌﺽ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﻋﻀﻭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﻨﻔﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻑ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﻴﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻹﺸﺭﺍﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻨﺠﺩ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻴﺎﻨﺼﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﺭﻱ ﻻ ﻴﺠﻌل ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﺭﻓﻘﺎ ﻋﺎﻤﺎ ﻭﻻ ﻴﺠﻌل‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﻜﻼ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﻴﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻀﺢ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺸﺭﺍﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺃﺤﺩ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺠﺎﺀ ﻓﻴﻪ )ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﻻ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺎ ﺨﺎﻀﻌﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﺍﻷﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﻭﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻁﻌﻥ ﺃﻤﺎﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ)‪.(15‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺘﺤﺎﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﺭﻭﻁ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺘﺤﻘﻕ‬
‫ﻗﺒل ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺤل ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻭﺇﻻ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل()‪ .(10‬ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻤﺩﻟﻭل ﻤﺼﻁﻠﺢ‬
‫ﺼﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﺃﻭﺴﻊ ﺒﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻪ‬
‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻨﺼﻨﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﺤﺴﺏ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﺯﺍﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﻤﻌﺎﻥ ﻋﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻴﺴﺘﺨﺩﻤﻪ ﻟﻠﺘﺩﻟﻴل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ ﺒﻁﻠﺒﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺩﻯ ﻗﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺼﻭﺭ ﺜﻼﺙ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺏ ﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻁﻠﻘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻫﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻘﺎﺭﻴﺭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ)‪ .(11‬ﻻ ﺒل ﺇﻥ‬
‫ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻜﺎﻥ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﺘﺭﻭﻜﺎ‬ ‫ﻤﺼﻁﻠﺢ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻴﻁﻠﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻭﺼل ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻁﻠﻕ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺘﻌﺩ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻭﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل‬
‫ﺃﻨﻪ ﻻ ﻴﻭﺠﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻨﻊ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻴﺔ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ )‪ . . .‬ﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﻥ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ‬
‫ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﺇﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺃﻤﺭﺍ ﻤﺤﺒﺫﺍ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻟﻪ‬ ‫ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻭﻗﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺱ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻌﺎﻁﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺔ ﻤﺅﻗﺘﺎ ﺤﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺘﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﺤﺔ ﻭﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺒل ﻭﻤﻼﺀﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻅﻬﻭﺭ ﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻭﻟﻤﺩﺓ ﻻ ﺘﺯﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻬﺭﻴﻥ‪.(12)(...‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺤﻘﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﺃﻁﺭﺍﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪:‬‬
‫ﻭﻻ ﻴﻬﻡ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺴﻠﻔﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﻨﺸﺌﺕ ﺨﺼﻴﺼﺎ ﻹﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﻋﻁﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪.‬‬
‫ﺸﻜﻠﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺠﻠﻬﺎ)‪ .(16‬ﻤﺜﺎل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ‬ ‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺠﻬﺔ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺭﻗﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ‬ ‫ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﻭﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺠﺭﻱ‬
‫‪ 1993‬ﻤﻥ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﻁﻠﺒﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﻭﺍﺌﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺴﻤﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻭﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺓ )ﺝ( ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫‪- 347 -‬‬

‫ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1973‬ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻟﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﺩﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (24‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 3‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪1994‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﻕ ﻓﻲ ﻗﺒﻭل ﺃﻭ ﺭﻓﺽ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻷﺠﻨﺒﻲ ﺇﺫﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺃﺠﺎﺯﺕ ﻟﻠﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻌﺭﺽ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻗﺎﻤﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺇﺫﻥ ﺍﻹﻗﺎﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻨﻭﺤﺔ ﻟﻪ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﻜﻠﻴﻔﻪ ﺒﻤﻐﺎﺩﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺃﻱ ﺃﻤﻭﺭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﺭﻀﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻷﺨﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﺴﺒﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (23‬ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺭﺃﻴﻪ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻤﺯﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﻤﻬﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1972‬ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻤﻨﺢ‬ ‫ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻟﺠﺄﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺇﻥ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺨﻴﺹ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺴﺘﺄﻨﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺒﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﺈﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺭﺍﻋﻲ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺄﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻭﺹ )‪...‬ﻴﺘﻭﺠﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺩﺨل ﻤﺎ ﺘﺭﺍﻩ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺃﻱ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺸﺄﻥ ﻁﻠﺏ‬ ‫ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺴﻭﺩﺓ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ ﺒﺄﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺩﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﺘﺼﺭﻴﺤﺎ ﺒﺘﺴﻴﻴﺭ ﺒﺎﺹ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺨﻁ ﺍﻷﻋﻭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺘﻌﺭﺽ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺩﺨﻠﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺘﻌﺩﻴﻼﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬
‫– ﺇﺭﺒﺩ – ﺼﻭﻴﻠﺢ ﻗﺒل ‪ ...‬ﺍﺴﺘﻁﻼﻉ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻟﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻋﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺠﺩﺩﺍ)‪ .(17‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ "ﻷﻥ" ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺭﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺏ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺘﺴﻴﻴﺭ ﺴﻴﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺒﺸﺄﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ )‪ ...‬ﻻ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﻜﻭﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ()‪ .(23‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﺤﻕ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﻭﻅﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﻋﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﻻ ﺘﻌﻨﻲ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺭﺍﺀ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺤﺴﻥ‬
‫ﺒل ﻤﺅﺩﺍﻫﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺃﺭﺍﺩﺕ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺃﺨﺫ "ﺭﺃﻴﻪ" ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺩﻋﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﻋﺩ()‪.(18‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻭﻻ‪ ،‬ﺜﻡ ﻴﺒﻘﻰ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﻕ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭﻩ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻴﻅل ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺘﻌﺒﻴﺭﺍ ﻋﻥ‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﺠﺒﺎﺭﻴﺔ )ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ(‪:‬‬
‫ﺇﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻁﻠﺒﺕ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ)‪.(24‬‬ ‫ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﻔﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻻﻟﺘﺯﺍﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺎ ﺃﻱ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻻ ﻴﻜﺘﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻉ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﺈﻟﺯﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺃﻏﻔﻠﺕ‬
‫ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻴﻭﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺼﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺘﺒﺎﻉ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻭﺼل ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺃﻱ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻴﺘﺤﺩﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻻ ﺘﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﺒل ﺘﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻟﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺼﺭﻴﺤﺔ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻴﻨﻅﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ ﺨﺭﻭﺠﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﺭﻭﺝ ﻋﻨﻪ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺘﻪ ﺃﻭ ﺇﻫﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺃﻭ ﺤﺘﻰ ﺘﻌﺩﻴﻠﻪ)‪ .(25‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺼل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺘﻘﺘﻀﻴﻪ ﺤﻤﺎﻴﺔ ﺤﻘﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻭﺴﻼﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺘﺴﻤﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻵﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻵﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﺎﺒﻘﺔ)‪ .(26‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ)‪ .(19‬ﻭﺘﻭﻀﺢ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﻭل )‪ ...‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻓﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻗﺒل‬
‫ﺘﺒﻨﻲ ﻤﻀﻤﻭﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺸﺄﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺠﻌل ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻏﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﺭﺩ ﺃﻭ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﻓﺈﻨﻪ‬
‫ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻭ ﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻀﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺜﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻠﻘﺎﺀ ﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﺃﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺃﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺒﺤﺩ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻠﺯﻡ ﻟﻺﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﻥ ﺇﻏﻔﺎﻟﻪ ﻴﺸﻜل ﺇﻫﺩﺍﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ)‪ .(27‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﺤﺘﻰ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻜﻔﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺇﻴﺠﺎﺩ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﻴﺭ‬
‫ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﺎﺭ ﻴﺒﻘﻰ ﻟﻺﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺘﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻤﺎ ﺤﺩﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻟﻴﺴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﺒﻪ ﻜﻀﻤﺎﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺭﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻭل ﻋﻥ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻜﻠﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻬﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﻟﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ()‪.(20‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻉ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎﺕ ﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺨﺹ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻭﻤﻥ ﺃﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﻤﺜل ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ)‪،(28‬‬ ‫ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1958‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻓﺫ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻭﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻭﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻘﺴﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻭﻯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺘﻘﺘﺭﺤﻬﺎ ﻭﻟﻭﺍﺌﺢ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻭﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ)‪ .(29‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺘﺎﻥ ‪ 13‬ﻭ‪ 14‬ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ)‪ .(21‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ ﻭﺠﻭﺏ ﻋﺭﺽ‬
‫ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺏ ﺍﺴﺘﻔﺘﺎﺀ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻠﻭﺍﺌﺢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺼﻴﺎﻏﺘﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺤﻭل ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺇﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻰ ﻟﻠﺸﺭﻁﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺃﻥ ﻴﻘﺭﺭ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﺇﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺭﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻭﺍﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻀﺎﺒﻁ ﻟﻠﺘﺄﺩﻴﺏ)‪ .(22‬ﻭﻤﺜﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻭﺽ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﻌﺩ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (19‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﻗﺎﻤﺔ ﻭﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻷﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪34‬‬
‫‪- 348 -‬‬

‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻱ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻋﺭﻀﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﻭﻭﺠﺩﺕ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﻟﺘﻌﺩﻴﻠﻪ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻁﻠﺏ‬
‫ﻴﺠﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺃﺴﺎﺴﻪ ﺃﺤﻴﺎﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻭﺹ‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﻤﺭﺓ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺩﻴل)‪.(30‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺃﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬
‫ﻭﻅﻴﻔﺔ ﺍﻹﻓﺘﺎﺀ ﻭﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺭﺽ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺘﺼﺩﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ)‪ .(33‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻤﺼﺭ ﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (63‬ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺘﻤﺎﺭﺱ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ – ﺃﻓﺭﺍﺩﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺃﻡ ﻫﻴﺌﺎﺕ –‬
‫ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺒﻭﺠﻭﺏ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﻤﻬﺎﻤﻬﺎ ﻭﻓﻕ ﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺘﻤﺜل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﻭﺍﺌﺢ ﺒﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺴﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻟﻤﺭﺍﺠﻌﺔ ﺼﻴﺎﻏﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻶﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺩﻤﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﺒﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻰ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻲ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪43‬‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭﻩ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺃﻓﺭﺩﻨﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1979‬ﺒﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻭﺍﻓﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﻌﺒﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻗﺴﻤﻨﺎﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﻁﻠﺒﻴﻥ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺩﻥ ﻭﺍﻷﺤﻴﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺭﻯ ﻗﺒل‬
‫ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‬
‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﺜﻤﺔ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻜﺒﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻨﻜﺘﻔﻲ ﺒﺎﻹﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻭﺭﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﺘﺘﻤﺜل ﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ‬
‫)‪ (37‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻭﻙ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 28‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 2001‬ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺒﻤﺭﺍﺘﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻨﻭﻀﺤﻪ ﺤﺎﻻ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻴﻤﺎﺭﺱ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻙ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﺘﺭﺨﻴﺹ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻱ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﻨﺸﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﺩﺩﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻨﻅﺭﹰﺍ ﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﺠﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻴﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺴﻤﻰ ﻭﺜﻴﻘﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻭﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪/7‬ﺏ( ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻹﺸﻌﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ؛ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﻤﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 29‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 2001‬ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﻭﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻁﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺘﻤﺎﺭﺴﻬﺎ ﻭﻴﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺜﺎل ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬
‫ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﻟﻌﺎﻡ ‪ 1958‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (16‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﻴﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﻤﻬﺎﻤﻬﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭﻱ ﺒﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﻟﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻷﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ)‪ ، (31‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺏ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬
‫ﻗﺩ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻴﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺘﺭﺤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻭﻁ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺜﺎل ﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﺃﻭﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻤﺎ ﻭﺭﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺘﻴﻥ )‪ (53) ،(29‬ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻨﺎﻁﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‬
‫ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 47‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 2000‬ﺒﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ)‪ .(32‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺃﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺼﺭ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﻟﻭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ‬ ‫ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ ﻟﻌﺎﻡ ‪ 1971‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪(194‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻡ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻬﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻭﻁﺔ ﺒﻬﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﺩﺩﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺒﺈﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﻭﺭﻯ ﻟﻴﻤﺎﺭﺱ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺹ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﻗﻀﻰ ﺒﻪ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 55‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (195‬ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺤﺎﺕ‬
‫‪ 2002‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (9‬ﺒﺸﺄﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﻤﺎﺩﺓ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻭﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺒﺄﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻟﻠﺩﻭﺍﺌﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (164‬ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﺒﺈﻨﺸﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﻤﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﺘﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺴﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﻤﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻻ ﺸﻙ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ‬
‫ﻴﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺒﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ ﻴﻤﺜل ﻀﻤﺎﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻐﺔ ﺍﻻﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺎ‬ ‫ﻟﻠﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺭﻗﻰ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺭﺘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺴﻠﻴﻤﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻨﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺘﺒﺎﻋﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﺜل ﻀﻤﺎﻨﺔ ﻻﺤﺘﺭﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪.‬‬
‫‪- 349 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻭﻯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻲ‪:‬‬

‫ﻤﺤﺩﺩ)‪ .(42‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ ﻴﺒﺎﺸﺭ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻪ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻅﺎﻤﻪ)‪. (43‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﻓﺭﺩﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ‬
‫ﻭﻴﺘﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﺔ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ‬ ‫ﺃﻡ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺴﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻀﻌﺔ ﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺘﻪ ﺒﻤﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﺓ )ﺏ( ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻼ ﻴﻐﻨﻲ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﺁﺨﺭ ﻭﻟﻭ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻪ)‪.(34‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (3‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺭﻗﻡ )‪ (28‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪.1952‬‬ ‫ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺼﺭ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫)‪ ...‬ﻋﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻭﺤﺭﺹ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺠﻌل ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻁﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺘﻴﺢ‬ ‫ﻤﻨﺢ ﺍﻹﺠﺎﺯﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﻤﺭﺍﻓﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﻭﺝ ﻤﻥ ﺸﺄﻥ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻘﺴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺼﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻓﻴﻴﻥ ﻟﻠﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺹ ﻭﺤﺩﻩ ‪ ...‬ﻭﻻ ﻴﺠﺩﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻻﻜﺘﻔﺎﺀ ﺒﻌﺭﺽ‬
‫ﺒﻌﻤﻕ ﻭﺘﻘﻠﻴﺏ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻋﻨﺼﺭ ﻤﻬﻡ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻨﻔﺭﺩ ﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻘﺴﻡ ﺒﺈﺒﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ)‪ ،(44‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ ‪ .(35)(...‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺴﺘﻠﺯﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺼﺩﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﺤﺘﺭﺍﻡ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻲ ﻋﻨﺩ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﻓﻼ ﻴﻐﻨﻲ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺼﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻤﻥ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻻ ﻴﺤﻕ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻤﺎﺭﺱ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﻬﺎ ﺇﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﻫﻭ ﻋﻀﻭ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﺘﺸﻜﻴﻠﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻗﻀﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻨﻘﻴﺏ ﺒﺩﻻ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﺒﺈﺒﻁﺎل ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺘﻡ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫﻩ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻗﺒل ﻨﺸﺭ ﻤﺭﺴﻭﻡ ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺌﻬﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺼﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻤﺜل ﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺴﺘﻤﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ)‪ .(36‬ﻭﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻭﻴﺽ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻹﻨﺎﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺤﻠﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻨﺘﻬﺎﺀ ﻭﻻﻴﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺤﺩﺩ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻤﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻟﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﻨﺸﺎﻁﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺨﺎﺭﺝ ﺃﺩﻭﺍﺭ ﺍﻨﻌﻘﺎﺩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺤﺩﺩ‬ ‫ﻴﺠﻴﺯﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﺃﺩﻭﺍﺭﺍ ﻟﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ)‪.(45‬‬ ‫ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺃﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺇﺤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﻗﺒل‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻤﻬﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻨﻭﻋﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺴﺒﻕ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻓﻔﻭﻀﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻟﻠﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﻓﺈﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ؛ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ ﻋﺭﺽ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﺎﻁﻼ ﻭﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺘﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫﻩ ﻻ ﻴﺼﺤﺢ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻭﻟﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺸﻜل)‪ .(37‬ﻭﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ) ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻨﻴﻁﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ ﺘﻘﻀﻲ‬ ‫ﺼﻼﺤﻴﺔ ﺒﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻓﺈﻨﻪ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻤﺎﺭﺴﻬﺎ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬
‫ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )‪ ...‬ﻻ ﻴﺼﺤﺢ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻌﻭﻥ ﺒﻪ‬ ‫ﺒﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﻭﻻ ﻴﺤﻕ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻔﻭﺽ ﺃﺤﺩﹰﺍ ﺒﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺘﻬﺎ ﺇﻻ ﺒﻨﺹ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‬
‫ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺌﻨﺎﺱ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ‪ ...‬ﺇﺫ ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﺼﺭﻴﺢ)‪ ، (38‬ﻭﺒﺄﻥ )‪ ...‬ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻭﻴﺽ ﻴﺨﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻭﺽ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺌﻨﺎﺱ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺃﻭ ﻭﻗﺕ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻟﺼﺎﺤﺏ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺒﺸﺭﻭﻁﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ()‪.(39‬‬
‫‪ .(46)(...‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺴﺘﻠﺯﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﺩﺓ ﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻭﺤﺩﺩ ﻟﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺘﺭﺘﻴﺒﺎ ﺯﻤﻨﻴﺎ ﺨﺎﺼﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﺤﺘﺭﺍﻡ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﺴل)‪ .(47‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻟﻠﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ ﻗﻀﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺘﻘﺭﻴﺭ ﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺨﺘﺹ ﺒﺈﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻠﻙ‬
‫ﻜﻔﺎﻴﺔ ﺃﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻷﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﺭﻀﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺭﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺌﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻠﺘﺯﻡ ﺒﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺤﺩﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ‬
‫ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻠﻴﻥ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ‬ ‫ﺒﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﺼﻴﺎﻏﺘﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﻭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺩﻋﻲ)‪ .(48‬ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﺒﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻓﻨﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺠﻤﻴﻌﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻌﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎل ﻴﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‪ ،‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺩﺓ ﻤﻌﻘﻭﻟﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻪ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻘﺴﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ – ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺫﻫﺏ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻟﻠﻔﺘﻭﻯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻀﻡ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺭﺒﻊ‪،‬‬
‫– ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺇﻨﻤﺎ ﻴﺭﻴﺩ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ‬ ‫ﻟﻠﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﺸﻐﺎل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺸﺅﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻗﻌﻲ ﺒﺘﻔﺎﺼﻴﻠﻪ ﺠﻤﻴﻌﺎ ﺃﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺼﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ)‪ ،(40‬ﻭﺘﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﻜل ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﻤﺎ ﺭﺴﻤﻪ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻤﻀﺕ ﻤﺩﺓ ﻁﻭﻴﻠﺔ ﻭﺠﺏ ﻋﺭﺽ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺠﺩﻴﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎﻻﺕ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻘﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺁﺨﺭ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﻴﺭ ﺒﻪ ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ)‪ .(49‬ﻭﻗﺩ‬ ‫ﻜﺎﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ‪...‬ﺇﻟﺦ)‪ .(41‬ﻭﻴﻤﺎﺭﺱ‬
‫ﺫﻫﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ‪ ،‬ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻪ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﻗﺴﻤﻲ‬
‫‪- 350 -‬‬

‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﻨﺒﺤﺜﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺤﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻓﺼل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤل ﺒﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻴﺼﺩﺭﻩ ﻭﻜﻴل‬
‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻜﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﺄﺩﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎل‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻭﻋﻤل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻨﺹ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﺃﺼﺩﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻔﺼل ﺜﻡ ﻤﻀﺕ ﻤﺩﺓ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ‬
‫ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﻨﺎﻓﺫﺍ ﺒﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ)‪ .(53‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﺕ‬ ‫ﺃﻋﻭﺍﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻭﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﻻ ﻴﺴﺘﻁﻴﻊ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ )‪ ...‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻜﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﻨﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﺏ ﻋﺭﺽ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻓﺭﺒﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺁﺨﺭ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﻴﺭ ﺒﻪ ﻭﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺒﺎﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﻭﻤﻌﺩﻭﻤﺔ ﻻ ﻴﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﻤﻴﻌﺎﺩ()‪.(54‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺼل)‪ .(50‬ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﺫﻫﺏ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺁﺨﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻟﻠﻔﺘﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﺃﻥ ﻴﺭﺍﻋﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺼﻠﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺃﻨﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﺒﺠﻬﺔ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل‬ ‫ﺃﻱ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺤﺩﺙ ﻅﺭﻭﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺯﻡ ﺘﺸﻜﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﻭﺇﻻ ﻋﺩ‬ ‫ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻨﺸﺄ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻅﺭﻭﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﺠﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﺘﻭﺠﺏ ﺭﺃﻴﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺎ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺘﻌﻴﻴﻥ ﺃﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﺒﺘﺴﻤﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻗﻀﻰ ﺒﻪ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ)‪ .(51‬ﻭﻨﻌﺘﻘﺩ – ﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻨﺎ –‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻟﻜل ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ‬ ‫ﺒﺄﻥ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺩﺓ ﻤﻌﻘﻭﻟﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻀﻭﺍ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﺨﺼﻴﺹ ﻟﻴﻤﺜل ﺠﻬﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﺘﻘﺩﻴﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻌﻭﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻀﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻷﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺅﺩﻱ – ﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ –‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪.‬‬
‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﻨﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﻋﻨﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻗﻀﻰ ﺒﻪ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ)‪ .(55‬ﻭﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺼل ﺃﻥ ﻴﻤﺘﺩ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺨﺎﺼﺔ‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ )‪ ...‬ﺃﻥ ﺴﻜﺭﺘﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻴﺸﻤل ﺃﻗﺎﻟﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻜﻠﻬﺎ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺒﺈﻗﻠﻴﻡ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ "‪/1/9‬ﻭ"‬ ‫ﺒﻤﻨﻁﻘﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺭﺠﻊ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻥ ﻻ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﻋﻀﻭﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻻ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎل‬
‫ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻟﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻭﺠﻭﺩﻩ )ﻫﻭ( ﻟﺘﺄﻤﻴﻥ ﺘﺩﻭﻴﻥ ﻭﺤﻔﻅ ﻭﻗﺎﺌﻊ‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﻭﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﻟﻴﺱ ﺇﻻ ‪ ،(56)(...‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﻭﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﺜﻤﺔ ﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻻ‬
‫ﺘﻌﻴﻴﻥ ﺸﺨﺹ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻤﻬﻨﺩﺴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻭﻅﻴﻔﺔ ﺴﻜﺭﺘﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺃﻤﺭ‬ ‫ﻴﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻬﺎ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺇﻗﻠﻴﻡ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻴﺒﺎ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺎ ﻴﺠﻌﻠﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻁﻠﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺃﻤﺜﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﻤﻨﻁﻘﺔ ﻤﺤﺩﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺭﻨﺴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀﻫﺎ ﺒﻤﺴﻤﻴﺎﺘﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺸﻌﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺼﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﻟﻭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ‬
‫)‪ (8‬ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ)‪.(52‬‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺘﻴﻥ‬
‫)‪ (53) ،(29‬ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﺠﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻟﻠﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺴﻜﺕ ﻋﻥ‬ ‫ﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺌﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺠﺎﺯ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺘﺸﻜﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﺭﺍﺀﻯ‬ ‫ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻨﺎﻁ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺒﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺘﺘﻤﺜل‬
‫ﻟﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺭﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﻤﺎ ﻴﻭﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻷﻭﻗﺎﻑ ‪ ...‬ﺃﻥ ﻴﺸﻜل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻓﻨﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺘﺭﺍﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺭﺭﺓ ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻭﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﻭﺽ ﻭﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﺸﺄﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻤﻥ ﺤﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺼﺩﺭﻩ ﻤﻥ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺎ‬
‫ﻴﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻴﺸﺎﺀ ﻟﻴﺴﺘﺄﻨﺱ ﺒﺭﺃﻴﻪ ‪ ...‬ﻭﻻ ﻤﺤل ﻟﻠﻘﻭل ﺒﺄﻥ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل‬ ‫ﻭﺴﻠﻴﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﻋﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻭﻤﺘﺸﻌﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﺇﻻ ﺃﻨﻨﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻑ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ()‪.(57‬‬ ‫ﻨﺩﺭﺠﻬﺎ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺙ ﺍﻵﺘﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻴﻥ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺤﻀﻭﺭﻫﻡ ﻭﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﺍﺴﺘﺒﺩﺍل ﺃﺤﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‬
‫ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺂﺨﺭ ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺠﺯ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﻻ‬ ‫ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ‪ ،‬ﻻ ﺒل‬ ‫ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺭﺍﻋﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ‬
‫‪- 351 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻤﻥ ﻴﻤﻠﻙ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻬﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ‪ .‬ﻤﺜﺎل ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ‬ ‫ﺇﻥ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺭﺕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻨﻌﺩﻤﺎ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻗﻀﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (31‬ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺠﺘﻤﻊ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺃﺤﺩ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺍﺸﺘﺭﺍﻙ )‪ ...‬ﺃﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﻥ ﻨﻴﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﺒﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻪ‪ .‬ﻭﻻ‬ ‫ﺃﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺼﻤﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺃﻥ ﺃﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺼﻤﺔ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻜﻌﻀﻭ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﻟﻠﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺸﻜﻼ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻨﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺨﻼﻑ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻭﻻ ﻴﻭﺠﺩ ﻨﺹ ﻴﺠﻴﺯ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻨﻴﺏ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻏﻴﺭﻩ‪ .‬ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻜﺄﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻜﺘﻭﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻭﺹ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺩ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺅﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ )‪ ...‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺃﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻨﺹ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺩﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻌﻭﻥ ﺒﻪ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍ ﻤﻨﻌﺩﻤﺎ ﻻ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻟﻠﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺠﺎﺯ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺅﻫﺎ ﺒﺄﻴﺔ ﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺇﺫ‬ ‫ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺒﻪ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺒﺎﻁﻼ ﻷﻨﻪ ﻤﺒﻨﻲ‬
‫ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﺘﺒﻠﻴﻐﻬﺎ ﺸﻔﺎﻫﺎ)‪ (65‬ﻭﻟﻡ ﺘﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺴﺎﺱ ﺒﺎﻁل()‪ .(58‬ﻭﺫﻫﺒﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺤﻜﻡ ﺁﺨﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻨﻪ " ﺇﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺅﺩﻱ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺘﻬﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺃﻨﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺒﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﻋﻀﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﻭﻟﻡ ﻴﻔﻭﻀﻪ‬
‫ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ)‪.(66‬‬ ‫ﺇﻨﺎﺒﺔ ﻏﻴﺭﻩ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻓﺈﻨﻪ ﻴﻘﺘﻀﻲ ﺒﺄﻥ ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺼﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ")‪ . (59‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﻓﻘﺩ‬
‫ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻗﺼﺭﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻴﻜﺘﻤل ﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺏ ﻓﻘﻁ‬ ‫ﻟﻁﻑ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺸﻲﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺤﺩﺓ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﻭﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻗﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻨﻌﻘﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺒﺎﻁﻼ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺘﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺁﺜﺎﺭ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﻡ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺸﻲﺀ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻭل ﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﺘﺨﺫﺕ ﻹﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺒﻁل‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻋﻴﺒﺎ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺎ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻓﺈﻨﻪ ﻻ ﻴﻭﺼﻡ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺒﻌﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺜﺒﺕ ﺃﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﺩﻴﻠﻴﻥ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻟﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻴﺔ)‪ .(67‬ﻭﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ‬ ‫ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ)‪ .(60‬ﻭﻨﺤﻥ ﻨﺅﻴﺩ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻤﻴﻌﺎﺩ ﻤﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﻟﻴﺘﺴﻨﻰ ﻟﻸﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﻷﻨﻪ ﻴﺘﻤﺎﺸﻰ ﻤﻊ ﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻥ ﻴﺭﻓﻕ ﺠﺩﻭل ﺍﻷﻋﻤﺎل ﻀﻤﻥ ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺘﻀﻴﻪ ﺴﺭﻋﺔ ﺇﻨﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻷﻋﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﺎﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻻ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ)‪.(68‬‬ ‫ﺒﺸﺭﻁ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺜﻤﺔ ﻤﺎﻨﻊ ﻤﺎﺩﻱ ﺃﻭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻴﻤﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﻀﻭ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﻭﺯﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻷﺼﻴل ﻤﻥ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻌﻘﺩ ﺠﻠﺴﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺴﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﻬﻴﺌﺔ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﺎ‪ :‬ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﺤﻠﻰ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﻜل ﻤﻅﺎﻫﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ ﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺇﻥ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻘﻼل‪ .‬ﻓﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻻ ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺘﻀﻰ ﻤﻥ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻭﻻ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ ﺃﻱ ﻋﻀﻭ ﺫﻭ ﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﻤﺎ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻷﻥ ﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﺭﻭﺡ)‪ ،(61‬ﻜﺄﻥ ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﻓﻲ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻓﻴﻊ ﻤﻭﻅﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺃﻥ ﺠﻠﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺭﺸﺢ ﻟﻠﺘﺭﻓﻴﻊ)‪ ،(62‬ﻭﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻟﻙ ﻋﺩﺍﺀ ﺸﺨﺼﻲ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻋﻀﻭ‬
‫ﺘﻌﻘﺩ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺴﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﻟﺘﺯﺍﻡ ﺒﺴﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻑ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺹ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺸﻔﻬﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﻰ ﺒﻭﺠﻭﺏ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺭﻴﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﺇﻓﺸﺎﺌﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﻘﺩ ﺠﻠﺴﺔ‬ ‫ﺘﻨﺤﻲ ﻋﻀﻭ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺘﻘﻭﻴﻡ ﺃﺒﺤﺎﺙ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻋﻠﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻗﻴﺎﻡ ﺨﺼﻭﻤﻪ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﺍﺀ ﺒﻴﻨﻪ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺒﺭﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﻏﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻁﻼﻉ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ﻴﺨﺸﻰ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺤﻜﻤﻪ ﻭﺤﻴﺩﺓ ﺭﺃﻴﻪ)‪ .(63‬ﻭﻟﻬﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﻪ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻋﻤﺎل)‪ .(69‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺯﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻐﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﺨﺼﻭﺼﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻋﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺒﺩﻱ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺒﺤﺙ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺃﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﺩ ﻟﻼﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻔﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺩ ﻤﺤﺎﻜﻤﺘﻬﻡ)‪.(64‬‬
‫ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻁﺭﺃ ﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻋﺩ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﺘﺒﻠﻴﻎ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻭﻋﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻭﺇﻻ ﺒﻁل ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬
‫)‪ ...‬ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻌﻘﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻋﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺭﺭ ﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﺎﺘﻪ ﺒﻐﻴﺎﺏ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺌﻪ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺘﺒﻠﻐﻭﺍ‬ ‫ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﻓﻲ ﻤﻭﻋﺩ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻫﻭﺍ ﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﺒﺤﺙ ﺃﻫﻤﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺘﺒﻌﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻫﻭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ‪:‬‬
‫ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀﻩ()‪.(70‬‬ ‫ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‬
‫‪- 352 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺭﻯ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﻨﺼﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ‪:‬‬
‫)ﻫﻭﺭﻴﻭ( ﻫﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻭﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺎﺵ‬ ‫ﻻ ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ)‪ .(74‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻻ ﺒﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻴﻜﻔﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺤﻀﺭ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻟﻴﻜﺘﻤل ﺒﻬﻡ‬
‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻭﺹ ﻨﺒﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﺄﺘﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﻭﺨﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺃﻥ ﺘﻘﺘﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‬ ‫ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﻴﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺃﺤﻴﺎﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺃﻱ ﺃﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﻏﺭﺒﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﻐﺭﻴﺏ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﻤﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻓﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻭ ﻜل ﺸﺨﺹ ﻟﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪/8‬ﺝ‪ (1/‬ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻀﻭﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻭﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻨﻪ ﺍﻻﺸﺘﺭﺍﻙ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺩﺍﻭﻻﺘﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺎ ﺒﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﻤﺎ ﻻ ﻴﻘل ﻋﻥ ﺃﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺌﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ‪ .‬ﻷﻥ ﺍﻷﺸﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺒﺎﺀ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻬﻡ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﻭﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺩ )ﺏ( ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻬﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒﻠﻬﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺤﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (41‬ﻤﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺯﺭﺍﻋﻴﻴﻥ ﺭﻗﻡ )‪(19‬‬
‫ﻤﻌﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﺭﻏﻡ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼ ﻴﻭﺠﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 98‬ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻟﺸﺅﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺒﺄﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺫﻴﻥ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺴﻬﻤﻭﺍ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺨﺒﺭﺍﺘﻬﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﹰﺎ ﺒﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻘﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﺒﺘﻘﺩﻴﻡ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺴﻠﻴﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺭﺘﺄﺕ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻻ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻬﻡ‬ ‫ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻨﺼﺎﺏ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻨﻪ ﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ‬
‫ﺤﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ)‪ (75‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﺃﺨﺫﺕ ﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (12‬ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﻟﻠﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﺒﺎﻷﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻨﺼﻑ‬
‫ﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻟﻠﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺫﻴﻥ ﻴﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻗﻀﺕ ﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ ﺒﻤﻥ ﻴﺭﺍﻩ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺒﺭﺓ ﻟﻺﺴﻬﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻗﺭﺭﺕ )‪ ...‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﻷﺼل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻤﻊ ﻤﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻱ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻨﻌﻘﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺒﺄﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺌﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻊ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺭﻨﺴﺎ ﻭﻤﺼﺭ‬ ‫ﻴﻘﻊ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺎ ﻭﺃﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻨﺩ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﺼﺭﺍﺤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺸﺘﺭﺍﻙ ﺸﺨﺹ ﺃﺠﻨﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺩﺍﻭﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺒﻁﻼﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﻭﻗﻭﻉ ﻋﻴﺏ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻱ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ‬ ‫ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺔ()‪ .(71‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻁﻭﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺅﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﻟﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺩﻴﺏ)‪ .(76‬ﻭﻨﻌﺘﻘﺩ ﺃﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻓﻀل ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﺭﻙ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺫﻫﺒﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻤﻬﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ‬
‫– ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺴﻜﻭﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ – ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻘﺩﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻀﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ‬ ‫ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺴﻜﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﻋﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻨﺼﺎﺏ‬
‫ﻴﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤﺩﺓ ﻋﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺒﺎﺀ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﻓﻘﻀﺕ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )‪ ...‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻭﻤﺩﻯ ﻗﻭﺓ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻭﺴﻜﺕ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺭﻴﺢ ﺒﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻻﻨﻌﻘﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﺃﻗل ﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼ ﻤﻨﺎﺹ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺼل ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻻ‬ ‫ﺠﻤﻴﻌﺎ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻟﻭ ﻏﺎﺏ ﺃﺤﺩﻫﻡ ﻟﻤﺎ ﺼﺢ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺏ‪ (72)(...‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﺇﻻ ﺒﻌﺩ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻭﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺘﻤﺤﻴﺹ‪ .‬ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺫﻫﺒﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﻻﺤﻘﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻠﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻋﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺒﻜﺎﻤل ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭﻩ ﻤﻥ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺇﺨﻔﺎﺀ ﺃﻱ ﺠﺯﺀ‬ ‫ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻷﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﻀﺕ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )ﺇﺫﺍ ﺴﻜﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻘﺼﻴﺭ ﺃﻭ ﺇﻫﻤﺎل ﺃﻭ ﻋﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﻷﻥ‬ ‫ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻨﺼﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﻨﻌﻘﺎﺩ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﹰﺎ ﺒﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﺠﺯﺌﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺃﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻻ ﻴﻜﻔﻲ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﻨﺼﻑ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻨﻌﻘﺎﺩ "ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ" ﺒﺄﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻻﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺒﻁﻼﻨﻪ)‪.(77‬‬ ‫ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺌﻬﺎ‪ ...‬ﺼﺤﻴﺤﹶًﺎ‪ .(73)(...‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺴﺠﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺏ ﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻭﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺍﻵﺭﺍﺀ ﺘﻌﺩ‬ ‫ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻐﺔ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﺃﻱ ﺒﺄﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺭﻴﺭ ﺘﻌﺩ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺔ ﻭﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻭﺀ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﻜﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺠﺎل ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻻ ﺸﻙ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻭ ﺘﺯﻭﻴﺩ ﻤﺼﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻨﺹ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻻﺕ )‪ ،(78‬ﻷﻥ ﺍﻷﺼل‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺠﺎﺀ ﺒﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ )‪ ...‬ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﻫﺫﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻻ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺤﻀﻭﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﻤﻬﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺎ ‪ ...‬ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﺇﺴﻬﺎﻤﺎ ﻓﺎﻋﻼ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﺭﻱ ﺒﺼﺩﺩ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻴﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻤﺤﻴﺹ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻠﺴﺔ ﻴﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻨﺼﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﺭﻭﺤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ‬
‫‪- 353 -‬‬

‫ﺭﺍﺒﻌﺎ‪ :‬ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﻤﺤﻀﺭ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﻭل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﻱ ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﻤﺤﻀﺭ ﺒﻤﺎ ﺩﺍﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺒﻁﺭﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺭﻴﺭ ﻴﺘﻨﺎﻓﻨﻰ ﻤﻊ ﺴﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺩﺍﻭﻻﺘﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﺹ‬
‫ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻤﻠﺨﺹ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪ .(79)(...‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺒﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺭﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻭﻴﺜﺒﺕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺼﺎﺩﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺇﺠﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ )‪ ...‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺸﺫ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﻭﺠﺏ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻹﺠﻤﺎﻉ‪ .‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻟﻙ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻭﺭﺩﺕ‬ ‫ﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻟﻼﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻹﺒﺩﺍﺀ‬
‫ﺘﺤﻔﻅﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺒﻨﻭﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻓﺘﺜﺒﺕ ﺘﻠﻙ‬ ‫ﺭﺃﻴﻬﻡ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﻡ()‪ .(80‬ﻭﺘﺸﺩﺩ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻔﻅﺎﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺤﻅﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻀﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻻ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﺍﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁﻬﺎ ﻓﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﺒﺄﻥ )ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻀﺭ ﺇﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﺒﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﻤﺤﻴﺹ ﻭﺩﺭﺱ ﻭﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ‬
‫ﻓﺈﻥ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺘﺤﺭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻀﺭ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻋﻴﺒﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﻲ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺼﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ()‪ .(81‬ﻭﺒﻨﺎ ‪‬ﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﺘﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺭﻴﺭ ﻻ‬
‫ﺘﻭﻗﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻀﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﻭﺍﻓﻘﻴﻥ ﻜﺎﻨﻭﺍ ﺃﻡ‬ ‫ﺘﻌﺩ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺔ ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻠﺘﺯﻡ ﺍﻟﻀﻭﺍﺒﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎﺭ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺁﻨﻔﹰﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﻴﻥ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﻨﺘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﺴﺔ ﻤﺒﺩﺌﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻭﻗﻴﻌﻪ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﻻ‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ‪:‬‬
‫ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺘﻪ)‪.(86‬‬ ‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻨﺘﻬﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ‬
‫ﺨﺎﻤﺴﺎ‪ :‬ﻭﻻﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻭﺽ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ ﺃﻱ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺸﺄﻥ‬
‫ﻻ ﺘﺴﺘﻨﻔﺫ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﻻﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺭﻭﺽ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻ ﺘﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‪ ،‬ﺒل‬ ‫ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺴﺭﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻷﺼل ﺃﻥ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻵﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺄﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻴﺤﻕ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺒﺎﺩﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻠﻘﺎﺀ ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﺼﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭﻴﻥ ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺭﺩ ﻨﺹ ﺒﺨﻼﻑ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻤﺜﻠﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻤﺠﺩﺩﺍ ﺃﻭ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺒﺸﺄﻨﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺒﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻷﻭل ﺃﻭ ﺒﺘﻌﺩﻴﻠﻪ ﺃﻭ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺌﻪ ﻭﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﺨﺫ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻨﻴﺔ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻪ ﻭﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺠﺩﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻻ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻗﺩ ﺃﺼﺩﺭﺕ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ)‪.(87‬‬ ‫ﺒﺄﻜﺜﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﺼﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﻗل‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ ﺘﺫﻫﺏ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺴﺤﺏ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻘﻴﺩﺓ ﺒﻔﺘﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻠﻭﺍﺀ ﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺘﻪ ﺒﺎﻹﺠﻤﺎﻉ ﺃﻭ ﺒﺄﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺼﻭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺘﻴﻥ ﻴﻭﻤﺎ)‪ .(88‬ﻭﺘﻠﺘﺯﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﺼل ﺃﻥ ﻻ ﻴﻠﺯﻡ ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻓﻕ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺨﻠﺼﺕ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺼﻭﻴﺕ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻟﻬﻡ ﺍﻻﻤﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﻋﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ‪ ،‬ﺇﻻ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﻻ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻟﻺﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺘﻜﺭﺍﺭ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺘﺒﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺘﻜﻭﻴﻥ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻫﻭ ﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﻨﻭﻉ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻀﻐﻁ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺒﺫﻭﺍﺘﻬﻡ ﻜﻤﻤﺜﻠﻴﻥ ﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼ ﻴﻤﻠﻙ ﻫﺅﻻﺀ ﺍﻻﻤﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﻋﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺁﺭﺍﺀﻫﻡ ﻭﺇﻻ ﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ)‪.(82‬‬
‫ﺒﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﻤﻌﻴﻥ)‪.(89‬‬ ‫ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )‪ ...‬ﻟﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﻬﺩﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻌﻴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻀﻭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺒﻊ‬ ‫ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺒﺩﻱ ﺭﺃﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻜل ﺍﻷﻤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺘﻌﺭﺽ ﻻﺴﺘﻜﻤﺎل ﺤﺴﻥ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻥ ﻤﻨﺎﻁ ﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺔ‬
‫ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻴﺴﺘﻠﺯﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﻀﻭ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻫﻭ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺭﺃﻴﻪ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻭﺍﺠﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺃﻭﻻ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻤﺘﻨﻊ ﻋﻀﻭ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺃﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻠﻌﻤل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﺤﺩﺩ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﺎﻁﻼ()‪ .(83‬ﻭﻻ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺼﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺘﻪ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺩﺭﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺭﺠﺤﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺭﺩ ﺒﺫﻟﻙ ﻨﺹ ﺼﺭﻴﺢ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﻁﻠﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﺘﺘﺎﻟﻴﻴﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭﻴﻘﺼﺩ ﺒﺎﻟﺼﻭﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﺢ ﻟﻠﺭﺌﻴﺱ )ﺘﻀﺨﻴﻡ ﺼﻭﺘﻪ ﻭﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‬ ‫ﻜﺄﻨﻪ ﻋﻥ ﺼﻭﺘﻴﻥ ﻓﻴﺅﺨﺫ ﺒﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺠﺯﺀ ﻤﻨﻪ()‪ .(84‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﻭﺭﺩ ﻤﺜل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼ ﻴﺠﻭﺯ ﻟﻠﺭﺌﻴﺱ‬
‫ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﺕ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﺯل ﻋﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺤﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺭﺭ ﻟﻪ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻗﻀﻰ ﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺒﺼﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﻨﻭﻀﺤﻪ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ)‪.(85‬‬
‫‪- 354 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺸﻜل ﻟﻠﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﻭﺽ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ‪:‬‬
‫ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺘﺭﻜﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺼﺔ ﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺒل‬ ‫ﺜﺎﺭ ﺨﻼﻑ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﺒﺸﺄﻥ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل‬
‫ﻟﻠﻁﻌﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻ ﺘﻘﺒل ﻀﺩﻫﺎ ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﺒﻪ()‪.(97‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺫﻫﺏ ﻓﺭﻴﻕ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻫﻭ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻨﺎ ﻨﺅﻴﺩ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻟﺏ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺫﻭ ﻁﺎﺒﻊ ﻗﻀﺎﺌﻲ ﻷﻨﻪ ﻴﺤﻭﻱ ﻜل ﺍﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺴﻤﺢ‬
‫ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﺠﺭﺩ ﻋﻤل ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﻷﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ ﻭﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻌﺒﻴﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﻡ‪ .‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺘﺤﻀﻴﺭﻱ ﺨﺎل ﻤﻥ ﺃﻱ ﺁﺜﺎﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﺭﻏﻡ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺤﺩﺙ‬ ‫ﻋﺩﻩ ﺁﺨﺭﻭﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺎ ﻷﻨﻪ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ‬
‫ﺁﺜﺎﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺘﺒﻨﺘﻪ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﻭﻴﺭﺘﺏ ﺁﺜﺎﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻭﻴﺨﻀﻊ ﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻤﺼﺩﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺘﻨﺴﺏ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻵﺜﺎﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺤﻴﻥ ﻭﺼﻔﻪ ﺜﺎﻟﺙ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﻻ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﺒﺩﻭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺎ‬ ‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺠﺢ ﻓﻘﺩ ﻋﺩﻩ ﻋﻤﻼ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺎ ﺘﺤﻀﻴﺭﻴﺎ ﻴﺴﺒﻕ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺨﺹ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ ﻤﻊ ﻭﺠﻭﺏ ﺍﻷﺨﺫ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ)‪ (90‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ ﺫﻫﺏ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺃﻏﻠﺏ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻵﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﺎﺒﻘﺔ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻴﺤﺩﺙ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ)‪.(91‬‬
‫ﺘﻁﺎﺒﻕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻭﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﻟﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﻥ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻴﺫﻫﺏ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﻴﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﻠﻙ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ‪ .‬ﻓﺫﻫﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﺼﺒﺢ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺴﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻤﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺠﻭﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ)‪.(98‬‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺠﻪ ﻀﺩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺩﻱ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺠﺎﺀﺕ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻷﺤﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻨﻅﻡ ﺘﺼﺎﺭﻴﺢ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻟﻌﺎﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﺩﻱ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻼﻫﻲ)‪ .(92‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺫﻫﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺇﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺘﺒﻴﻥ ﻟﻨﺎ ﻤﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻻ ﻴﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻲ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻓﺼﻠﻪ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺨﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺇﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﻭﻻ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﺤﻼ ﻟﻠﻁﻌﻥ )‪ .(93‬ﻭﻗﻀﻰ ﺃﻴﻀﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﻻ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻨﺘﺞ ﺁﺜﺎﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ‬ ‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﻀﺩ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺘﺒﺩﻴﻪ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﻻ‬
‫ﺘﺘﻨﺎﻭل ﺍﻷﺭﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﺭﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﻀﺩ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺒﺘﺄﻴﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﺎ ﻟﻡ ﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺠﻪ‬
‫ﻨﺒﺤﺜﻪ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻴﻠﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺒﺈﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ)‪ .(94‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻫﻭ ﻤﺠﺭﺩ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺭﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺘﺤﻀﻴﺭﻱ ﻻ ﻴﻘﺒل ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﺒﺎﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺃﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻤﻪ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻭﺹ )‪ ...‬ﺃﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﻬﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻴﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﺤﺘﺭﺍﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺘﻨﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻋﻲ ﻋﻥ ﻭﻅﻴﻔﺘﻪ ﻭﻨﻘﻠﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻭﻅﻴﻔﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﻟﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺭ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻻ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﺒل ﻫﻭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺘﻘﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﺒﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺎﺕ ﻭﻋﻴﻭﺏ‬ ‫ﺘﺤﻀﻴﺭﻱ ﻤﺤﺽ ﺘﺭﻓﻌﻪ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻻ ﻴﻘﺒل ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺘﺸﻭﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺫﻫﺏ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺤﻼ ﻟﻠﻁﻌﻥ ﺃﻤﺎﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪.(95)(...‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻹﺨﻼل ﺒﺎﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺌﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻋﻴﺒﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺸﺄﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻴﻜﺎﺩ ﻴﻨﻌﻘﺩ ﺇﺠﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺨﺫ ﺒﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﻻﺤﻕ‪ ،‬ﺤﺘﻰ ﻟﻭ ﻟﺠﺄﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻭﺃﺨﺫ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻁﻠﺏ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺤﻴﺙ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻋﻤﺎل ﺘﺤﻀﻴﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺭﻭﺽ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻴﺴﺒﻕ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ)‪ .(99‬ﻏﻴﺭ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﺘﻤﻬﻴﺩﻴﺔ ﺘﺴﺒﻕ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ‪ ،‬ﺘﺨﻠﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻭﻟﻤﺴﻭﻏﺎﺕ ﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻟﻴﺱ ﻜل‬ ‫ﺃﺜﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻷﻨﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺘﻨﺸﻲﺀ ﺃﻭ ﺘﻌﺩل ﺃﻭ ﺘﻠﻐﻲ ﻤﺭﻜﺯﺍ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﻋﻴﺏ ﻴﻤﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ‬ ‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺘﻤﺱ ﺃﻱ ﺤﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻘﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ)‪ .(96‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻬﻭ ﻴﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻨﺫ ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﻟﻴﺴﺕ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺩﻡ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﻴﺯ ﺘﻐﻁﻴﺔ ﻋﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺴﺘﺤﺎل‬ ‫ﺠﻭﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﺴﺘﻘﻠﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀﻩ ﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺃﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺤﻜﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ )ﻟﻴﺱ ﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫‪- 355 -‬‬

‫ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺭﻤﺠﺔ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺒﺭﻓﺽ ﺍﻻﻨﺘﻤﺎﺀ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻴﻴﻥ‬ ‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﻤﻭﻗﻊ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻻﻤﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﻋﻤﺩﺍ ﻋﻥ ﺘﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﺍﺕ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﻨﺴﺤﺎﺏ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻠﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺒﻘﺼﺩ ﺘﻌﻁﻴﻠﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻜﻥ‬ ‫ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻼﻑ ﻗﺩ ﺜﺎﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﺼﺩﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ ﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺭﻓﺎﺕ ﺘﻌﻁﻴل ﺃﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺭﻗﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻱ ﺃﻭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻟﻠﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺒل ﺠﺎﺀﺕ ﻟﻅﺭﻭﻑ ﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺇﻻ ﺃﻨﻪ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺠﻭﻉ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﻁﺎﺭﺌﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻗﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻻ ﺘﻌﻔﻰ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﺃﻨﻪ ﺒﻨﻰ ﻗﻀﺎﺀﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻀﺎﺒﻁﻴﻥ ﻤﻬﻤﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻴﺭﻓﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺘﺫﺭﻉ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻫﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻠﺸﻜل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻓﻲ ﻭﺠﻭﺩﻫﺎ ﻜﺄﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺨﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻫﻴﺌﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺤﻘﻘﻬﺎ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﻷﺼﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻨﺎﺠﻡ ﻋﻥ ﺒﻁﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺘﺤﺭﻜﻬﺎ)‪ .(106‬ﺃﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻋﻴﺒﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻵﺨﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺇﻤﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺎ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﺩﺍ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺘﻐﻁﻴﺔ ﻋﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺴﺘﺤﺎل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺇﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫)‪ ،(100‬ﻏﻴﺭ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﻠﻀﺎﺒﻁﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﺫﻴﻥ ﺃﺸﺭﻨﺎ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﻟﻡ‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻤﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻹﻋﺎﻗﺔ‬ ‫ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺭﻓﻀﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻁﻠﺒﹰﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺭﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻤﺤل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﺒﺸﻜل ﻅﺎﻫﺭ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﺴﺒﻕ ﻴﻔﺭﻀﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻘﻀﻰ ﺒﺸﺄﻥ ﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺘﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻨﻘل ﻋﻀﻭ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺘﺩﺭﻴﺱ ﺨﺎﺭﺝ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪ .‬ﺃﻭ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﻘﺘﺭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻭﺍﺭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻜل ﻤﻥ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﻘﺴﻡ ﻭﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬ ‫ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺨﻼﻓﺎ ﻟﻸﺼﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺭﺭﺓ)‪ .(101‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺃﻥ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺒﺄﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺀﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻤﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﻻ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﺇﺠﺭﺍ ‪‬ﺀ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﹰﺎ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﹰﺎ ﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﺄﻥ ﻭﺇﻥ )‪ ...‬ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺒﻐﻴﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺸﺄﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﺘﺨﻠﻔﻪ ﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻟﻌﻴﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺭﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻴﺠﻌل ﻓﻲ ﻤﻜﻨﺔ ﺃﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺫﻜﻭﺭﻴﻥ ﻭﺭﺃﻴﻬﻤﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﺭﺽ ﺃﻤﺭ ﺇﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻹﻗﺎﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻠﺯﻡ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻌﺭﻗل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻻ ﻴﺭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻓﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﻴﺘﺤﻭل‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﺒﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻹﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺒﻌﺩ ﻓﺤﺹ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻭل ﻟﻬﻤﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺠﺭﺩ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻏﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﻤﺴﻭﻏﺎﺘﻪ ﻭﺘﻤﺤﻴﺹ ﺩﻭﺍﻋﻴﻪ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻤﻠﺯﻡ ﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻓﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺒﻘﺔ ﻭﻫﻭ ﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﻴﺘﺨﻠﻑ ﻋﻥ ﺇﻏﻔﺎﻟﻪ ﺒﻁﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻟﻌﻴﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل)‪ .(102‬ﻭﻟﻡ‬
‫ﻴﺨﺎﻟﻑ ﺼﺭﻴﺢ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﺹ‪.(107)(...‬‬ ‫ﺘﺨﺭﺝ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺞ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺝ‪ -‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﻗﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻱ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻭﻫﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﻀﺕ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺇﻏﻔﺎل‬
‫ﻁﺒﻘﺎ ﻟﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺭﻭﻀﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ ﻴﺸﻜل ﻫﺩﺭﺍ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻜﻔﻠﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻟﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺴﻜﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻟﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﺤﻜﻤﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﺒﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻌﺩﻴﻠﻪ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﺒﺄﻥ )‪ ...‬ﺨﻠﻭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺨﺫ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺌﻪ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺎﺘﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺘﻴﻥ ﺍﺘﺒﺎﻉ ﻨﻔﺱ ﺘﻠﻙ‬ ‫ﻴﻭﺠﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻭﺍﻗﺹ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻴﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻴﺘﺤﺘﻡ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺅﻩ()‪.(103‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺼﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﺴﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪:‬‬
‫ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻴﺠﺏ ﻟﺘﻌﺩﻴﻠﻪ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻬﺎ)‪ .(108‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻻ ﻴﻭﺠﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺠﻭﺍﺯ ﺘﻐﻁﻴﺔ ﻋﻴﺏ‬
‫ﺇﻋﻤﺎل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻜﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻨﺢ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺠﻡ ﻋﻥ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺍﺨﻴﺹ ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺭﺍﺨﻴﺹ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ)‪.(109‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﻫﻭ ﺍﺴﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺇﺘﻤﺎﻤﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻜﻥ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﺼﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻟﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ‬ ‫ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﺒﺴﺒﺏ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﺇﻨﺸﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺭﺴﻤﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‪ ،‬ﺒﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ‬ ‫ﺒﺩﻴل ﻋﻨﻬﺎ )‪ .(104‬ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺭﻓﻀﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺇﺒﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺴﺒﻕ ﻭﺒﻴﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻴﺩﺨل ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﻬﺎ)‪ ،(105‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻋﻔﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻠﺘﺯﻡ ﺒﻤﺎ ﺃﻭﺠﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺨﺫ‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺒﺘﻘﺎﻋﺴﻬﻡ ﺃﻭ ﺴﻭﺀ ﻨﻴﺘﻬﻡ ﻗﺩ‬
‫ﺭﺃﻱ‪ .‬ﺇﺫ ﺘﻤﺜل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻗﻴﺩﺍ ﺤﻘﻴﻘﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺠﻌﻠﻭﺍ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺤﻴل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻥ ﻴﻌﺭﻗل‬
‫ﺭﻏﻡ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻴﺒﻘﻰ ﺤﺭﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭﻩ‪ .‬ﻭﻨﻅﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺒﻌﺽ ﻤﻨﻬﻡ ﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ‬
‫‪- 356 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل‬ ‫ﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺫﻫﺏ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻻ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﻟﻪ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻷﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻤﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﺩﺨﺎل ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺭﻜﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻻ ﺘﻌﺩﻭ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺇﺤﺩﻯ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﻨﺸﻴﺭ ﺃﺨﻴﺭﺍ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺒﻎ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﻤﺎﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻘﺘﻀﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻜﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻨﻌﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺒل‬ ‫ﻓﻘﺩ ﻗﻀﻰ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﻴﻠﺯﻡ ﻗﺒل ﺼﺩﻭﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﺒﻁﻼﻨﻪ ﻓﺤﺴﺏ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‬ ‫ﻁﻠﺏ ﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺩﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻲ ﻟﻤﻌﺎﺸﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ‪,‬‬
‫ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )ﺇﺫﺍ ﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺩﻴﺔ ﺒﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﺃﻨﻪ ﻭﺇﻥ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻠﺯﻡ ﺒﺎﺘﺒﺎﻋﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻁﻠﺏ ﻫﺫﻩ‬
‫ﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺼﻤﺔ ﻭﻟﻴﺱ ﻋﻥ ﻤﺩﻴﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺭ ﻜﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ)‪ ،(110‬ﻭﻴﻠﻐﻲ‬
‫ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺸﻜل ﻤﺠﺭﺩ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻻ ﺘﻨﺤﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ – ﻤﻥ ﺒﺎﺏ ﺃﻭﻟﻰ – ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺴﺘﻭﻑ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻌﻭﻥ ﺒﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﻻﻨﻌﺩﺍﻡ ‪.(115)(...‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻁﻠﺒﻬﺎ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩﺍ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻋﻴﺏ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜﺎ‪ :‬ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺭﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻤﺸﺘﺭﻙ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻴﺴﺘﻁﻠﻊ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻋﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻋﻴﺏ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤل‪:‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻤﺘﺤﻘﻘﺎ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﺘﻘﺩ ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﻤﻘﻴﺩ‬
‫ﻗﺩ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﺨﻼﻓﺎ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺃﻴﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ‬ ‫ﺒﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻠﺯﻡ ﻟﻪ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺀﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﺄﻥ ﺘﺨﺎﻟﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﺃﻥ ﻜل ﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻌﺩﻡ ﺼﺤﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺘﻪ )ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ( ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺘﺨﻁﺄ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭﻩ ﺃﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺄﻭﻴﻠﻪ‪ .‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺃﺨﺫﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬ ‫ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺏ ﻤﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺒﻐﻴﺎﺏ ﻜﻠﻲ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩﺕ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺠﺯﺌﻲ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ‬
‫ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻨﻪ ﺴﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﺤﺘﻤﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﻭﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ)‪ .(111‬ﺒﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻴﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻀﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺏ ﻋﻨﺩ ﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺸﻭﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻭﺠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﻭﺒﺸﻜل ﻏﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻡ ﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻋﻴﺒﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺤﺘﻰ ﻭﺇﻥ ﺘﻌﻠﻘﺕ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ)‪.(112‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﻰ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻲ‬ ‫ﻭﺘﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺘﻘﻴﺩ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺒﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ‬
‫ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻓﺘﻠﻐﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻓﺫﺓ ﺒﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺄﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺤﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩﺕ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺯل ﺒﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ ﺘﻘﺭﺭ ﺒﺸﺄﻥ ﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻤﻘﺩﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺭﺍﺡ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺤﺘﻰ ﻟﻭ‬ ‫ﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻨﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅ ﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﺒﺈﻏﻼﻕ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﻗﺩ ﺃﻗﺭﺕ ﻨﻬﺎﺌﻴﺎ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﻭﺘﻡ ﻨﺸﺭﻫﺎ ﺒﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻨﻊ ﻭﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ)‪ (116‬ﻭﺃﻟﻐﺕ‬ ‫ﻁﺒﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻓﻅ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﺎﻁﻼ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ﻷﻨﻪ‬ ‫ﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺔ)‪ .(113‬ﻭﻴﺭﺠﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ‬
‫)‪...‬ﺴﺎﻴﺭ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻔﻴﻥ "ﻭﻫﻲ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ" ﻓﻴﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻭﺹ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻓﺫﺓ ﺒﺘﺎﺭﻴﺦ ﺼﺩﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺘﺭﻀﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺨﻁﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻋﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺒﻕ ﺒﺸﺄﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻴﺱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺒﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺒﺎﻷﻗﺩﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻘﺔ ﻟﺠﺯﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻻ ﺘﺒﺭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻙ‬ ‫ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻨﺎﻓﺫﺓ ﺤﻴﻥ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻓﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﺒﺄﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻷﻗﺩﻤﻴﺔ()‪.(117‬‬ ‫ﺤل ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺃﺼﺒﺢ ﻤﻨﻭﻁﺎ ﺒﻭﺯﻴﺭ‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻘﺘﻀﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ ﺒﺎﻟﺤل ﻤﻥ ﻭﻜﻴل‬
‫ﻴﺭﺍﻗﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀﻩ‬ ‫ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﻟﺩﺍﺌﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﺅﻭﻥ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﺭﻭﻁ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﺸﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻋﻴﺏ ﻴﻤﺱ ﻫﺫﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻌﺩ ﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺍ ﻭﻻ ﻤﻥ ﻭﻜﻴل ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﻜﻥ‪ ،‬ﻜﺄﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻏﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﻷﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﻨﺤﺼﺭ ﺒﺎﻷﻤﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺔ‪ ،‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻀﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﺎﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺒﺎﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻴﺔ)‪ .(114‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻨﺎ ﻨﻌﺘﻘﺩ ﺒﺄﻥ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻴﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫ﺘﺨﻠﻑ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﺇﻫﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺩﻡ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ‬
‫‪- 357 -‬‬

‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﻌﻴﺏ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻤﺒﻨﻴﺎ ﺒﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﺏ ﺒﻐﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻋﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻴﺱ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﺇﺴﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﻟﻌﺩﻡ ﺘﻭﻓﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺘﺴﺒﻴﺏ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺃﻡ ﻻ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻁﻠﻭﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻴﻌﺩ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻉ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﻴﻘﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﺏ ﺃﻭ ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺏ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺼﺤﻴﺢ‪ .‬ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒـ‬
‫ﻋﺩﺩﹰﺍ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻭﺃﻋﻠﻨﺕ ﻋﻥ‬ ‫)‪ ...‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺩﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻭﺼﻴﺘﻬﺎ ‪. . .‬‬
‫ﻨﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﻤﻀﻤﻭﻨﻪ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭﻩ ﻓﻌﻼ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ‬ ‫ﺒﺭﻓﺽ ﺘﺴﺠﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺩﻋﻴﻥ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﻤﻔﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺫﻟﻙ ﻻ ﻴﻌﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒـ )‪...‬‬ ‫ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﺘﻌﺎﺩل ﺸﻬﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺩﻋﻴﻥ ﺒﺴﻨﺘﻴﻥ ﻓﻘﻁ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻜﻭﻥ ﻭﺯﻴﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺘﺸﺎﻭﺭﺕ ﻤﻊ ﻭﺯﻴﺭ‬ ‫ﺒﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﺩﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻭﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﻓﺼﺤﺕ ﻋﻥ ﺃﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ‪ ...‬ﻗﺩ ﻋﺎﺩﻟﺕ ﺸﻬﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺩﻋﻴﻥ ﺒﺜﻼﺙ ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺘﻨﻭﻱ ﺤل ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺤل ﻻ ﻴﻘﻭﻡ ﺩﻟﻴﻼ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺃﻜﺎﺩﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺸﻬﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺘﻭﺼﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺒﻬﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﺴﺎﺀﺕ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺒل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺱ ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺸﺎﻭﺭﺕ ﻤﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻑ ﺘﻭﺼﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺔ ﻻﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻭﻗﺎﺌﻊ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺼﺤﻴﺤﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻷﺨﻴﺭ ﻭﻻ‬ ‫ﻭﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻨﺩﺴﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺎﻨﻊ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻴﻤﻨﻌﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﺩﻭﺍﺌﺭ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﺠﻤﻊ‬ ‫ﻤﻌﻴﺒﺎ ﺃﻴﻀﺎ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺅﻩ()‪.(118‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﻻﺌل ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺜﺒﺕ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺨﺎﻟﻔﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪.(121)(...‬‬ ‫‪ -3‬ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﻻ ﺸﻙ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻤﻭﻤﺎ ﻫﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺘﻤـﺔ‬ ‫ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺒﺘﻨﻭﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﻤﺤل ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺘﺯﻭﻴﺩﻫﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﺨﺒﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻘﺩ ﺃﻅﻬﺭﺕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺘﻤﻜﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺸﻜﻠﻴﺎ ﻴﺴﺒﻕ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻼﺌﻡ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻭﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺤﺩ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻲ ﺘﺠﻨﺏ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﻤﺠﺎﻨﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻟﻠﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻐﺒﺔ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺨﺎﻁﺌﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻼﺌﻤﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺘﺴﺭﻋﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻥ‬ ‫ﻀﻌﻴﻔﺔ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻻ ﻴﻤﻨﻊ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺼﻭﺭ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺩ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺸﺄﻨﻪ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬ ‫ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﺸﻭﺒﺔ ﺒﻌﻴﺏ ﺇﺴﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﺴﺘﻌﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩﺕ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻔﻴﻀﺔ ﻤﺘﺄﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻤﺘﺨﺼﺼﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺨﺒﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺠﺎﺀﺕ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎ ﻟﻐﺎﻴﺎﺕ ﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ ﺒﻌﻴﺩﺓ ﻋﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﺒﻭﺼﻔﻬﺎ ﻀﻤﺎﻨﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﻴﺴﺘﺨﻠﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻀﻲ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺏ‬
‫ﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﻟﺼﺩﻭﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺘﺭﺍﻋﻲ ﺤﻘﻭﻕ ﻭﺤﺭﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﻼ‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﺃﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﺼﻑ ﺒﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺯﺍﻴﺎ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﻭﺼﻠﻨﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺒﺤﺙ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻟﺼﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻜﻭﺍﻗﻌﺔ ﻋﺩﻡ ﺘﻭﺠﻴﻪ ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺒﻌﺽ‬
‫ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺼﻌﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﻊ ﺤﻀﻭﺭﻫﻡ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺒﻐﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺠﻤﻠﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺃﻭﻀﺤﻨﺎﻫﺎ ﺘﻔﺼﻴﻼ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺴﺘﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﻫﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻵﺨﺭﻴﻥ)‪ .(119‬ﺃﻭ ﺤﻀﻭﺭ ﺃﺤﺩ‬
‫ﺨﻼل ﻤﺒﺎﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺤﺴﺒﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻨﺸﻴﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻤﻥ ﻟﻪ ﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻴﻠﻲ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻭﻤﺩﺍﻭﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﻗﻀﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﺄﻨﻪ )ﺇﺫﺍ‬
‫‪ -1‬ﺃﻥ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺼﻭﺭﹰﺍ ﺜﻼﺜﺎﹰ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻲ ﺇﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﻴﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺩﻋﻲ ﻴﺅﺴﺱ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺭﺍﺭ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﺸﺅﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﺇﻟﺯﺍﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﺘﺄﺨﺫ ﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺯﻡ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻔﻴﻥ ﺒﺩﻴﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻅﻔﻴﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻋﻴﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺸﻜﻴل‬
‫ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﻭﺭ ﺠﻤﻴﻌﺎ ﺘﺩﺨل ﻀﻤﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺭﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻜل‬ ‫"ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ" ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻨﻅﺭﺕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺃﺤﺩ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻫﺫﻩ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺸﺤﻴﻥ ﻟﻠﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ﻓﺈﻨﻪ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻬﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻀﻭ‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺘﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ‪ ،‬ﺭﻏﻡ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ‬ ‫ﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻓﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺒﻨﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻴﺴﺘﻌﻤل ﻜﻼ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻁﻠﺤﻴﻥ ﺃﺤﻴﺎﻨﺎ ﻟﻠﺩﻻﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻌﻨﻰ ﻭﺍﺤﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭﻻ ﻴﻐﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺸﻴﺌﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺎ ﻤﺎ ﺩﺍﻡ‬
‫ﻭﻗﺩ ﺃﻭﻀﺤﻨﺎ ﻭﺠﻭﻩ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻑ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺭﻉ ﺃﻭﺠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺅﺨﺫ ﺭﺃﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺭﺸﻴﺢ ﻟﻠﺘﺭﻗﻴﺔ ‪ ...‬ﻓﺈﺫﺍ‬
‫‪ -3‬ﺜﻤﺔ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻟﻼﺨﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﺴﺩ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻨﺴﺤﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻗﺒل ﻜل ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‪ ،(120)(...‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻨﺎ ﻨﻌﺘﻘﺩ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺩ‬
‫‪- 358 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﻨﺩﻋﻭ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺈﺼﺩﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻁﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻭﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺸﺄﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻗﺒل ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﺴﺭﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ‪.‬‬
‫‪ -2‬ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﺘﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻴﺔ ﻭﻅﻴﻔﺘﺎﻥ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻴﺘﺎﻥ‬ ‫‪ -4‬ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻴﺘﻤﺜل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺒﻤﺭﺍﺘﺒﻪ‬
‫ﻤﻨﻔﺼﻠﺘﺎﻥ ﻭﻤﺘﻜﺎﻤﻠﺘﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﻓﺎﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺘﻤﺎﺭﺱ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻭﻅﻴﻔﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻠﺠﺄ ﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺤﺘﻰ ﻓﻲ ﻏﻴﺎﺏ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﺹ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺘﺼﻨﻑ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ‬ ‫‪ -5‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻨﺎﻁ ﺒﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﺜﻠﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺘﻤﺎﺭﺴﻬﺎ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ‬ ‫ﺃﻭ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻘﻼل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻀﺎﺒﻁﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﻭﻋﻤل ﺍﻟﻠﺠﺎﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻴﺔ ﺒﺤﻴﺙ ﻻ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺨﺎﻀﻌﺔ ﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﻤﻊ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺃﻫﻭﺍﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻻ ﺸﻙ ﺃﻥ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻘﺘﻀﻲ ﺘﻭﻓﻴﺭ‬ ‫‪ -6‬ﺜﺎﺭ ﺨﻼﻑ ﺒﺼﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺩ ﺃﻴﺩﻨﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﺼﺤﺔ ﻭﺴﻼﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺠﺢ ﻓﻘﻬﺎ ﻭﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ ﻜﻭﻨﻬﺎ ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺘﻤﻬﻴﺩﻴﺎ ﻻ‬
‫ﺠﻬﺔ ﻭﻻﺴﺘﻘﻼل ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺩﺍﺌﻬﻡ‬ ‫ﻴﺭﺘﺏ ﺃﻱ ﺃﺜﺭ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻨﻲ‪ .‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻬﻲ ﻻ ﺘﺨﻀﻊ ﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻭﺍﺠﺒﺎﺘﻬﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻌل ﻤﻥ ﺃﻫﻡ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻀﻤﺎﻨﺎﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺇﻻ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺭﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﺤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺘﺴﺒﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻋﺩﻡ‬ ‫ﺭﻗﺎﺒﺘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺌﻲ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺍﺴﺘﻨﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻠﻙ‬
‫ﺨﻀﻭﻉ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﺎﺴﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻁﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺱ‪ .‬ﻭﻻ ﺸﻙ ﺃﻥ‬ ‫‪ -7‬ﻟﻘﺩ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻘﻼل ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻤل ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﺘﻴﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻭﺭﺘﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺃﻱ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻱ‬
‫ﻼ ﻤﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﻌﻰ ﻨﺤﻭ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫﻴﺔ ﺃﻤﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻷﻥ ﻜ ﹰ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺯﻡ‪ ،‬ﺇﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺸﻜﻠﻲ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻱ ﻴﺘﻌﻴﻥ ﺍﺴﺘﻴﻔﺎﺀﻩ ﻗﺒل ﺼﺩﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺒﻠﻭﻍ ﺍﻷﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺫﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﺇﻥ ﺃﻫﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﻭﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺤﻘﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻓﺭﺍﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺭﺃﻱ ﻤﻌﻴﺏ ﻓﻲ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﻥ ﺸﺄﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ‬
‫‪ -3‬ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺃﻭ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻤﻊ ﻤﺭﺍﻋﺎﺓ ﻤﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻘﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻴﻀﻊ ﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﻋﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴل ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﻋﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻹﻫﻤﺎل ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺄ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺩﺍﺨل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻴﺤﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﻟﺩﻯ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﻭﻍ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻜﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻅﺭﻭﻑ‬
‫ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺁﺭﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺒﻤﺎ ﻴﺤﻘﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﻬﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻨﺎﺌﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻼﺤﻅ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﻴﻨﺹ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺃﻏﻠﺏ ﺍﻷﺤﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﺃﻫﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺨﻠﺼﻨﺎ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻬﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻭﻴﺴﻜﺕ ﻋﻥ ﺒﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﺼﻴل‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻭ‬ ‫‪ -1‬ﺩﻋﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺭﻉ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺨﺫ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻨﻘﺹ ﻻ ﺒﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻼﻓﻴﻪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺯﻤﺔ ﻟﻺﺩﺍﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ – ‪،1992‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻬﻭﺍﻤﺵ‬

‫ﺹ ‪.52-50‬‬
‫ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﻴﺎﺴﻴﻥ ﻜﺭﻴﻡ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ‬ ‫)‪(4‬‬ ‫‪B.L.‬‬ ‫‪Jones,‬‬ ‫‪Garner's‬‬ ‫‪Administrative‬‬ ‫‪law,‬‬ ‫‪7edt,‬‬ ‫)‪(1‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ "ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ" ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ ﻏﻴﺭ‬ ‫‪Butterworths, London, 1980. p.38-39.‬‬
‫ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،1990 ،‬ﺹ‪.16-11‬‬ ‫‪P.P. Craig, Administrative law. 3edt, Sweet and‬‬ ‫)‪(2‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﻭ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﻜل ﻤﻥ )‪ (La Ferriere‬ﻭ)‪ (Hostiou‬ﺫﻜﺭﻩ‬ ‫)‪(5‬‬ ‫‪Maxwell, London – 1994. p. 258, Jones, op.cit. p.38-39.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺩﻴﺩﺍﻤﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ ﻫﺎﻤﺵ ﺹ‪ ،51‬ﻭﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺃﻴﻀﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺭﻴﻔﺎﺕ ﻭﻏﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﺩﺍﻤﻭﻨﻲ ﻤﺼﻁﻔﻰ‬ ‫)‪(3‬‬
‫ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ ﻋﺎﻁﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻁ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺃﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺸﻜﺎل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪- 359 -‬‬

‫ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺒﺤﺙ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺃﺒﺤﺎﺙ ﺍﻟﻴﺭﻤﻭﻙ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ ‪ ،1990‬ﺹ‪ ،246‬ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ ﺤﻠﻤﻲ‬
‫‪ ،17‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ ،3‬ﺃﻴﻠﻭل ‪ ،2001‬ﺹ‪.452‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻌﺒﺔ‬
‫)‪ (18‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،1973/3‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 4-3‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1973‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﻬﺩ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﻲ ﻟﻠﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺹ‪.1500‬‬ ‫‪ ،1967‬ﺹ‪.139‬‬
‫)‪Craig op.cit. p. 222-256, Jones, op.cit. p. 68-70, Alain (19‬‬ ‫ﻨﻭﺍﻑ ﻜﻨﻌﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ –‬ ‫)‪(6‬‬
‫‪Plantey, Droit et pratique de la fonction publique‬‬ ‫‪ ،2002‬ﺹ‪.33‬‬
‫‪internationale, paris – 1977, p. 283.‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 91/215‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ‬ ‫)‪(7‬‬
‫ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ ﻋﺎﻁﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.246‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻴﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺴﻨﺸﻴﺭ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻻﺤﻘﺎ ﺒﺎﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ‬
‫)‪ (20‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 993/247‬ﻓﻲ ‪ ،1993/10/31‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 6‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1993‬ﺹ‪.1117‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﻭل ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1994‬ﺹ‪ ،92‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻤﻌﻨﻰ ﺫﺍﺘﻪ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ‪،982/9‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،84/122‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 10-9‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪1985‬‬ ‫)‪(8‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 2‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1983‬ﺹ‪.181‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪ 1429‬ﻭﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺒﺨﺼﻭﺹ‬
‫)‪Maurice Duverger, elements de droit public, P.U.F. (21‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺴﻴﺏ‪ ،‬ﻨﻌﻤﺎﻥ ﺃﺤﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺏ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫‪Themis, Paris, p.260. Charles Debbasch, Contentieux‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺭﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﻭﻋﺸﺭﻴﻥ ﻋﺎﻤﺎ‬
‫‪administratif, Dalloz – 1975. p. 198.‬‬ ‫ﻤﻥ ‪ ،1997-1972‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪-288‬‬
‫ﺴﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‪،‬‬ ‫‪.289‬‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،7‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ – ‪،1996‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،79/38‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 12‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1979‬‬ ‫)‪(9‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.178‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.1769‬‬
‫)‪ (22‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻠﻁﻴﻑ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 92/119‬ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﻋﺎﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ‬ ‫)‪(10‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ –‬ ‫ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﻤﻨﺫ‬
‫‪ ،2002‬ﺹ‪ ،253‬ﺴﺎﻤﻲ ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺒﺩﺍﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1993‬ﻭﺤﺘﻰ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ .1997‬ﺇﺼﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺏ‬
‫ﺹ‪.242-241‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﺹ‪.140‬‬
‫)‪ (23‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،86/64‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ ،6-5‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1987‬‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﺨﻁﺎﺭ ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻗﻀﺎﺀ‬ ‫)‪(11‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.838‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻁﻼﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ –‬
‫)‪Laubadere, op.cit. p. 295-296. (24‬‬ ‫‪ ،1995‬ﺹ‪.295‬‬
‫)‪Ibid, p. 296. (25‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،95/45‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺠﺯﺀ ﺍﻷﻭل‪،‬‬ ‫)‪(12‬‬
‫)‪ (26‬ﺸﺤﺎﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،452‬ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻤﺼﺩﺭ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.291-290‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.596-591‬‬ ‫ﻴﻭﺴﻑ ﺴﻌﺩ ﺍﷲ ﺍﻟﺨﻭﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،2‬ﻁ‪،2‬‬ ‫)‪(13‬‬
‫)‪ (27‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،65/126‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 4‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1966‬ﺹ‪.433‬‬ ‫ﻟﻡ ﺘﺫﻜﺭ ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺭ – ‪ ،1998‬ﺹ‪.31-27‬‬
‫)‪Duverger, er, op.cit. p. 260. Debbasch, op.cit. p. 197- (28‬‬ ‫‪Jean Marie Auby et Roland Drago, Traite de‬‬ ‫)‪(14‬‬
‫‪198.‬‬ ‫‪Contentieux administrative, 3edt, T.1, LG.D.J – 1984. p.‬‬
‫)‪ (29‬ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.79‬‬ ‫‪313-314, Jones op.cit, p. 38-39, E.C.S. wade and G frey‬‬
‫)‪ (30‬ﻨﻭﺍﻑ ﻜﻨﻌﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫‪Philips, Constitutional and administrative law, 9edt, The‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﺎﻥ – ‪ ،2002‬ﺹ‪.222-218‬‬ ‫‪chaucer Press, G.B. p. 294, 826.‬‬
‫)‪ (31‬ﻴﺘﺸﻜل ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻭﻓﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺎﺩﺘﻴﻥ )‪ ( 63 ، 56‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‬ ‫ﺴﺎﻤﻲ ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻁ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﻴﻌﻴﻨﻪ ﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،1‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ – ‪ ،2004‬ﺹ‪.441-440‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﻨﻴﻥ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺓ ﻭﻫﻡ ﺭﺅﺴﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻤﻥ‬ ‫)‪ (15‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 74/14‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 8-7‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1974‬‬
‫‪ 9‬ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﻴﻥ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺒل ﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻬﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺭﺌﻴﺱ‬ ‫ﺹ‪.821‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺭﺌﻴﺱ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﻭﺥ ﺒﻭﺍﻗﻊ ‪ 3‬ﻟﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﻡ‬ ‫)‪Andr'e de laubadere, Traite de droit administrative, 6edt, (16‬‬
‫ﻭﻤﺩﺓ ﻋﻀﻭﻴﺘﻬﻡ ‪ 9‬ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﺒﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺠﺩﻴﻭﻴﻤﺎﺭﺱ‬ ‫‪L.G.D.J, Paris – 1973, p. 295-296, Auby et Drago,‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﺨﺘﺼﺎﺼﺎﺕ ﻨﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺭﻗﺎﺒﺔ‬ ‫‪op.cit. p313.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻨﻴﻥ‪ .‬ﺃﻨﻅﺭ ﻨﻌﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺏ‪،‬‬ ‫‪Laubadere, op.cit. p. 295, Auby et Drago, op.cit, p. 322-‬‬ ‫)‪(17‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻁ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ‬ ‫‪323.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،1999/‬ﺹ‪.550-548‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺃﻴﻀﺎ ﻤﻭﺴﻰ ﺸﺤﺎﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪Charles Debbasch, Marcel Pinet, Les grands texts (32‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺌﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫‪- 360 -‬‬

‫)‪ (50‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ‪ ،1963/3/23‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ‬ ‫‪administratifs, sirey – 1970, p. 28-29, Duverger, op.cit.‬‬
‫ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.899‬‬ ‫‪p.19.‬‬
‫)‪ (51‬ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،595‬ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪،‬‬ ‫)‪(33‬‬
‫‪Debbasch and Pinet, op.cit. p. 542-543.‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.165‬‬ ‫)‪ (34‬ﺴﺎﻤﻲ ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،445‬ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬
‫‪C.E: 13/12/1970, Rec, p. 110.‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.80-79‬‬
‫)‪ (52‬ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺭﻨﺴﺎ‬ ‫)‪ (35‬ﻁﻌﻥ ‪ 2118‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪31‬ﻕ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ – ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،33‬ﺝ‪،1‬‬
‫‪Jean – Marie Auby et Ader Robert Duccos, institutions‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.488-487‬‬
‫‪administratives, 3edt, Dalloze – 1973, p. 173.‬‬ ‫)‪ (36‬ﺇﺩﻭﺍﺭ ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،2‬ﻤﻁﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﺭﻭﺕ –‬
‫ﻭﻓﻲ ﻤﺼﺭ ﻤﺎ ﻨﺼﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺩﺓ ‪ 163‬ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺩﺴﺘﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻨﻅﺭ‬ ‫‪ ،1975‬ﺹ‪ ،130-128‬ﻤﺼﻁﻔﻰ ﺃﺒﻭ ﺯﻴﺩ ﻓﻬﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺩ ‪ 56-53 ،35-29‬ﻤﻥ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻭﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،4‬ﻤﻨﺸﺄﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺭﻑ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺴﻜﻨﺩﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ‪.‬‬ ‫– ‪ ،1979‬ﺹ‪ ،489-488‬ﻋﻤﺭ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻭﺒﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫)‪ (53‬ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.147‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ – ‪ ،2001‬ﺹ‪.302‬‬
‫)‪ (54‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،71/155‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 1‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1973‬ﺹ‪.28‬‬ ‫)‪C.E 4/6/1958, Recueil des arrest du conseil d' Etat (37‬‬
‫)‪, 1/12/67, Rec, p. 208. C.E 15/3/1961, Rec, p.914. (55‬‬ ‫‪(Collection, Lebon et autres) p.308.‬‬
‫)‪ (56‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 75/69‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 6-5‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1976‬‬ ‫‪Yves Weber, L'Administration Consultative, Paris, 1968,‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.790‬‬ ‫‪p.200.‬‬
‫)‪ (57‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،68/68‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 10-9‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1969‬‬ ‫)‪ (38‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ، 83/68‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 2-1‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1985‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.702‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.72‬‬
‫)‪ (58‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،79/125‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 8‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1980‬‬ ‫)‪ (39‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ، 79/41‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ ،2‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1980‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.1060‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.164‬‬
‫)‪ (59‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،1976/69‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﻋﺩﺩ ‪ 10 ، 9‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1977‬‬ ‫)‪Duverger, op.cit, p. 261-262, Debbasch et pinet, op.cit, (40‬‬
‫ﺹ ‪.1167‬‬ ‫‪p. 542-543.‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 30/10/57, Rec, p. 565. , 9/5/52, Rec, p. 233 , Auby (60‬‬ ‫ﺇﺴﻤﺎﻋﻴل ﺍﻟﺒﺩﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،2‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ‬
‫‪ et Drago, op.cit, p. 316‬ﻭﺃﻨﻅﺭ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ – ‪ ،1993‬ﺹ‪.181-180‬‬
‫)‪Ibid, p. 317-318. Plantey, op.cit, p. 284-285. (61‬‬ ‫‪Laubadere, op.cit. p. 63-64, Duverger, op.cit. p. 150-‬‬ ‫)‪(41‬‬
‫)‪ (62‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪6/1798‬ﻕ‬ ‫‪153.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ‪ ،1954/3/25‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.1088‬‬ ‫)‪ (42‬ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،120-116‬ﺨﻠﻴﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬
‫)‪ (63‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ‪ 2118‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪31‬ﻕ‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.113‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ‪ .1987/12/22‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺭﺭﺘﻬﺎ‬ ‫)‪ (43‬ﻨﻭﺍﻑ ﻜﻨﻌﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.222-220‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،33‬ﺝ‪ ،1‬ﺹ‪.488-487‬‬ ‫)‪Craig, op.cit. p. 256, Jones, op.cit, p. 69-70, Peter bibby, (44‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 18/4/1969, Rec, p 208. (64‬‬ ‫– ‪Effective use of Judicial review, 1edt, Tolley, Exeter‬‬
‫ﺃﻨﻅﺭ ﻋﻤﺭﻭ ﻓﺅﺍﺩ ﺃﺤﻤﺩ ﺒﺭﻜﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺩﻴﺒﻴﺔ )ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬ ‫‪1995, p. 36-37.‬‬
‫ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ(‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ – ‪ ،1979‬ﺹ‪plantey, ،300-299‬‬ ‫‪C.E: 22/3/1950, Rec, p. 176, 26/10/1956, Rec, p. 389,‬‬ ‫)‪(45‬‬
‫‪op.cit., p. 288‬‬ ‫‪23/11/1963, Rec, p. 628.‬‬
‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،80/47‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻊ‪ ،‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1981‬‬ ‫)‪(65‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ .81/137‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 9‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1983‬‬ ‫)‪(46‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.1231‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.1227‬‬
‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،82/134‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 12-10‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1983‬‬ ‫)‪(66‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﻤﻲ ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،445‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺯﻴﺯ‬ ‫)‪(47‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.1350‬‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻌﻡ ﺨﻠﻴﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺤﻜﻤﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ‪ 1/165‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 2‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺌﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ‬ ‫)‪(67‬‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪ ،2004 ،‬ﺹ‪.114‬‬
‫ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪ ،659‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺤﻤﺩﻱ ﻴﺎﺴﻴﻥ ﻋﻜﺎﺸﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 3266‬ﺠﻠﺴﺔ ‪ .1986/4/13‬ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻕ‬ ‫)‪(48‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﻨﺸﺄﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺭﻑ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.114‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺴﻜﻨﺩﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،1987 ،‬ﺹ‪.389‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،66‬ﺃﺒﻭ ﺯﻴﺩ ﻓﻬﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬ ‫)‪(49‬‬
‫ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.600‬‬ ‫)‪(68‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،491‬ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪،246‬‬
‫ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،600‬ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪،‬‬ ‫)‪(69‬‬ ‫ﺨﻠﻴﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.114-113‬‬
‫‪- 361 -‬‬

‫‪Laubadere, op.cit, p. 296, Auby et Drago, op.cit.‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.100‬‬

‫‪p. 321325.‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،83/47‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻷﻭل ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1984‬‬ ‫)‪(70‬‬
‫‪C.E: 5/11/1957, commune , de, Abymes, Actualite,‬‬ ‫)‪(93‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.152‬‬
‫‪Juridique, de, droit, administratif , 1957, II, P.290‬‬ ‫ﺤﻜﻤﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ‪ ،1962/12/15‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ‬ ‫)‪(71‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺘﻌﻠﻴﻕ ﻤﻔﻭﺽ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ )‪ (Lasry‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ‬ ‫ﺹ‪ ،268‬ﻭ ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.663‬‬
‫‪C,E, 14/5/52 , (Bernger) R.P, 212.‬‬ ‫)‪(94‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ ،75/6‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ ،8-7‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1975‬‬ ‫)‪(72‬‬
‫ﺤﻜﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ‪7/3274‬ﻕ ﻋﻥ‬ ‫)‪(95‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.896‬‬
‫ﻋﻜﺎﺸﺔ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.99‬‬ ‫ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎل ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ‪ 86/43‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﻋﺩﺩ ‪10-9‬‬ ‫)‪(73‬‬
‫ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،590-589‬ﻜﻨﻌﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‬ ‫)‪(96‬‬ ‫ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1986‬ﺹ‪ ،868‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻓﻬﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﺭﻴﻡ ﺃﺒﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﺜﻡ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،281-280‬ﺍﻟﺸﻭﺒﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،302-301‬ﺃﺒﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﺜﻡ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪-338‬‬ ‫– ‪ ،2005‬ﺹ‪.341-340‬‬
‫‪.339‬‬ ‫‪M. Hauriou, Precis de droit administrative et droit‬‬ ‫)‪(74‬‬
‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 68/68‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 10-9‬ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1969‬ﺴﺒﻘﺕ‬ ‫)‪(97‬‬ ‫‪public, 11edt, sirey – 1927, p. 88.‬‬
‫ﺍﻹﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،702‬ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ‪ ،98/4‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ‬ ‫‪C.E: 2/2/1956, Rec, p. 607-608.‬‬ ‫)‪(75‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 11-10‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1998‬ﺹ‪ ،3843‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ‬ ‫‪C.E: 19/5/1961, Rec, p. 339‬‬ ‫)‪(76‬‬
‫‪ ،85/22‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ ،12-11‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1985‬ﺹ‪.1709‬‬ ‫ﻭﺃﻨﻅﺭ ﺃﻴﻀﹰﺎ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻓﺅﺍﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺴﻁ‪ ،‬ﺃﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ‬
‫ﺘﻔﺼﻴﻼ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﺩﺍﻤﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.67-66‬‬ ‫)‪(98‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺴﻜﻨﺩﺭﻴﺔ – ﺒﻼ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.94‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 12/12/52, Rec, p. 574, 2/7/65, p. 398. (99‬‬ ‫‪Craig, op.cit., p. 255, Bibby, op.cit, p. 36.‬‬ ‫)‪(77‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 8/1/1982, Rec, p. 1 , 1/6/1973, Rec, p. 382. (100‬‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺴﻁ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،162‬ﺴﺎﻤﻲ ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪،‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 24/6/64, Rec, p. 357, 15/7/58. Rec, p. 450. (101‬‬ ‫ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.445-444‬‬
‫‪Laubadere, op.cit, p. 264-265, Debasch, op.cit,‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،666‬ﺃﺒﻭ ﺯﻴﺩ ﻓﻬﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬ ‫)‪(78‬‬
‫‪p.721-724, Auby, Drago, op.cit., p. 320-321.‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.488‬‬
‫)‪ (102‬ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪/1396‬ﻕ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ ﺹ‪.624‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪5/417‬ﻕ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.662‬‬ ‫)‪(79‬‬
‫)‪ (103‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 62/116‬ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺤﻨﺎ ﺇﺒﺭﺍﻫﻴﻡ ﻨﺩﺓ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫)‪(80‬‬
‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻨﺫ ﺒﺩﺍﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺹ‪.1261‬‬
‫ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1953‬ﻭﺤﺘﻰ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ .1971‬ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،86/47‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 8 ،7‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1988‬‬ ‫)‪(81‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﺎﻥ ﺹ‪.351‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.1183‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 15/7/1953, Rec, p. 373. (104‬‬ ‫ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.160‬‬ ‫)‪(82‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 27/5/66, Rec, p. 367. (105‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ 75/109‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 8-7‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1976‬‬ ‫)‪(83‬‬
‫)‪ (106‬ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺱ ‪C,E 21/6/74, R,P. 354. , 14/11/75,‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪ .1202‬ﻭﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﻋﺒﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ ﺹ‪.161-160‬‬
‫‪P.571, 8/4/59, P. 241, 23/1/1931, P. 135, 12/10/1956, P.‬‬ ‫ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.595‬‬ ‫)‪(84‬‬
‫‪Auby,‬‬ ‫‪ 356, 8/6/1962, P. 382, 16/11/1956, p. 432.‬ﻭﺃﻨﻅﺭ‬ ‫‪C.E: 4/11/49, Rec, p. 455.‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ‪Weber, op.cit. p.97.‬‬ ‫)‪(85‬‬
‫‪Drago, op.cit. p. 320-321, Debbasch, op.cit., p. 723-727,‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،668-666‬ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬ ‫)‪(86‬‬
‫‪Debbasch, institution administrative, 2edt, L.G.D.J.,‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.162-161‬‬
‫‪Paris – 1972, p. 319.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.162‬‬ ‫)‪(87‬‬
‫ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﺨﻭﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،148-142‬ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ‪6/198‬ﻕ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ ﺹ‪.1331‬‬ ‫)‪(88‬‬
‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،166‬ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.686‬‬ ‫ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.595‬‬ ‫)‪(89‬‬
‫)‪ (107‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻁﻌﻥ ‪ 49‬ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪26‬ﻕ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺘﻔﺼﻴﻼ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﺩﺍﻤﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،75-69‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ‬ ‫)‪(90‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،32‬ﺝ‪ ،1‬ﺹ‪ ،325-324‬ﻭﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺘﻌﻠﻴﻕ‬ ‫‪weber, op.cit., p.185 et suive‬‬
‫ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻓﺅﺍﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺴﻁ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ‬ ‫)‪ (91‬ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،660-657‬ﺃﺒﻭ ﺯﻴﺩ ﻓﻬﻤﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺴﻜﻨﺩﺭﻴﺔ – ‪ ،2000‬ﻫﺎﻤﺵ ﺹ‪.155 -154‬‬ ‫ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،491-487‬ﺴﺎﻤﻲ ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ‬
‫)‪C.E: 7/3/1962 , Rec, p. 152, 28/4/1967 Rec ,p. 180 (108‬‬ ‫ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪ ،445-440‬ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪-245‬‬
‫ﻭﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ ﺒﺎﻻﺘﺤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻲ ﻟﻨﻘﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﺎﺩﻟﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.246‬‬
‫‪Marcel Waline, Droit administrative, 9edt, sirey. Paris-‬‬ ‫)‪C.E: 9/1/1952, Weber, op.cit, p. 216-217, (92‬‬
‫‪- 362 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪ 2348‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﺒﻌﺩﻫﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫‪1963, p. 462, Debbasch, Contentioux administrative,‬‬

‫)‪ (113‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،66/52‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 5‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1966‬ﺹ‪.558‬‬ ‫‪op.cit., p. 725-726.‬‬
‫)‪ (114‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،1982/9‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 2‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1983‬ﺹ‪.181‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺩﻴﺩﺍﻤﻭﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.315 -308‬‬
‫)‪ (115‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،1984/13‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 9‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1984‬‬ ‫)‪ C.E: 29/3/1968, Rec, p. 271. (109‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ‪Webere, op.cit., p.‬‬
‫ﺹ‪.1333‬‬ ‫‪ 223.‬ﺠﺒﺭﻴل‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.135‬‬
‫)‪C.E: 4/10/1957, Rec, p. 508. (116‬‬ ‫)‪C.E: 20/11/1960, Rec, p. 43. (110‬‬
‫)‪ (117‬ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪6/191‬ﻕ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.1073‬‬ ‫)‪C.E: 25/1/1957, Rec, p. 63., 23/11/1951, Rec, p. 553. (111‬‬
‫)‪ (118‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،85/134‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 4-3‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪،1987‬‬ ‫ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻨﻅﺭ‪ :‬ﻓﺅﺍﺩ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻤﻭﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺹ‪.514‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻀﻤﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ ‪،2000-1999‬‬
‫)‪ (119‬ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺭﺠﻊ ﺴﺎﺒﻕ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.605‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.94‬‬
‫)‪ (120‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺭﻗﻡ ‪6/1798‬ﻕ ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺃﺤﻜﺎﻡ‬ ‫)‪ (112‬ﺤﻜﻡ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺭﻗﻡ ‪ 1405‬ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 5‬ﻗﻀﺎﺌﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻤﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.1088‬‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺃﻗﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫)‪ (121‬ﻋﺩل ﻋﻠﻴﺎ ‪ ،82/12‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ ،4‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1983‬ﺹ‪.494‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ‪ 15‬ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1946‬ﺇﻟﻰ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1961‬ﺍﻟﺠﺯﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 3‬ﺃﻴﻠﻭل‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺠﻊ‬

‫ﺸﻁﻨﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺨﻁﺎﺭ‪ ،1995 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻗﻀﺎﺀ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﺨﺩﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻁﻼﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺒﺎﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺸﻭﺒﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺭ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،2001 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺃ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺭﺴﺎﺌل ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ‪:‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺃﺒﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﺜﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﺩ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﺭﻴﻡ‪ ،2005 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻁﻤﺎﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺴﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،1996 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،7‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺃﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺩﻴﺩﺍﻤﻭﻨﻲ ﻤﺼﻁﻔﻰ‪ ،1992 ،‬ﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺸﻜﺎل ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺴﻁ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻓﺅﺍﺩ‪ ،2000 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﺘﺎﺏ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺴﻜﻨﺩﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻠﻁﻴﻑ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،2002 ،‬ﻗﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺒﺩﻭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺇﺴﻤﺎﻋﻴل‪ ،1993 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،2‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺍﻹﻟﻐﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﺇﺩﻭﺍﺭ‪ ،1975 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،2‬ﻤﻁﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺒﻴﺭﻭﺕ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺒﺭﻜﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺭﻭ ﻓﺅﺍﺩ ﺃﺤﻤﺩ‪ ،1979 ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻁﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺩﻴﺒﻴﺔ "ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻬﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺼﻁﻔﻰ ﺃﺒﻭ ﺯﻴﺩ‪ ،1979 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻭﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ"‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻁ‪ ،4‬ﻤﻨﺸﺄﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺭﻑ‪ ،‬ﺍﻹﺴﻜﻨﺩﺭﻴﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ ﻋﺎﻁﻑ‪ ،1990 ،‬ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻁ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻜﻨﻌﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻨﻭﺍﻑ‪ ،2002 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻷﻭل‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺠﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﺴﺎﻤﻲ‪ ،2004 ،‬ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻁ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻜﻨﻌﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻨﻭﺍﻑ‪ ،2002 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪ ،1‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﺏ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺴﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺤﻜﺎﻡ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﻴﺎﺴﻴﻥ ﻜﺭﻴﻡ‪ ،1990 ،‬ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺭﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ‪،‬‬
‫ﺤﻤﺩﻱ ﻴﺎﺴﻴﻥ ﻋﻜﺎﺸﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ ‪.1987‬‬ ‫ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺒﻐﺩﺍﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺒﺩﺍﻴﺔ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪ 1972‬ﻭﻟﻐﺎﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺤﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻤﺤﻤﻭﺩ‪ ،1967 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻋﺎﻡ ‪ 1976‬ﺠﺯﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺯﺀ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ ﻤﻥ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪ 1987‬ﻭﻟﻐﺎﻴﺔ ﻋﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻌﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﻬﺩ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﻲ ﻟﻠﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫‪ 1990‬ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻲ ﻤﺤﻤﺩ ﺨﻼﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ‬ ‫ﺨﻠﻴﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﺯﻴﺯ ﻋﺒﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻌﻡ‪ ،2004 ،‬ﺩﻋﻭﻯ ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﻤﻨﺫ ﺒﺩﺍﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1993‬ﻭﺤﺘﻰ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1997‬ﺜﻼﺜﺔ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻁ‪ ،1‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﺠﺯﺍﺀ‪ ،‬ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺨﻭﺭﻱ‪ ،‬ﻴﻭﺴﻑ ﺴﻌﺩ ﺍﷲ‪ ،1998 ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺝ‪،2‬‬
‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻤﻨﺫ ﺒﺩﺍﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪1953‬‬ ‫ﻁ‪ ،2‬ﻟﻡ ﺘﺫﻜﺭ ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺭ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺤﺘﻰ ﻨﻬﺎﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺔ ‪ ،1971‬ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻲ ﺤﻨﺎ ﺇﺒﺭﺍﻫﻴﻡ ﻨﺩﺓ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺸﺤﺎﺫﺓ‪ ،‬ﻤﻭﺴﻰ‪ ،2001 ،‬ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺠﺭﺍﺌﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺍﺕ ﻨﻘﺎﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻤﻴﻥ – ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺒﺤﺙ ﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺭﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺃﺒﺤﺎﺙ ﺍﻟﻴﺭﻤﻭﻙ ﺘﺼﺩﺭ ﻋﻥ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻴﺭﻤﻭﻙ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺩ ‪،17‬‬
‫‪- 363 -‬‬

‫ﺨﺎﻟﺩ ﺍﻟﺯﺒﻴﺩﻱ‬ ...‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ‬
administratifs, Sirey. ‫ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻨﻌﻤﺎﻥ ﺃﺤﻤﺩ‬1997-1972 ‫ﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﻭﻋﺸﺭﻴﻥ ﺴﻨﺔ‬

nd
Debbasch. 1972. Institution administrative, 2 ,L.G.D.J. paris .‫ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺏ‬
Duverger, Maurice, Elements de droit public, P.U.F. Themis, ،‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺭﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‬
Paris. .‫ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‬
Hauriou, Maurice. 1927. Precis de droit administratif et droit ،‫ﻤﺠﻤﻭﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺭﺭﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬
public, 11th ed, sirey. .‫ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺘﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﻠﺱ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻱ‬
Jones, B.L. 1980. Garner's Administrative law, 7th ed, :‫ ﺒﺎﻹﻨﺠﻠﻴﺯﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﺭﻨﺴﻴﺔ‬:‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﺎ‬
Butterworths, London. Auby, Jean - Marie et Drago, roland. 1984. Traite de
th
Laubadere, Andre de. 1973. Traite de droit administratif, 6 ed, contentieux administratif, 3rd, T.I., L.G.D.J.
L.G.D.J. Paris. Auby, jean – marie, et Duccos, ader robert, 1973. Institutions
Plantey, Alain. 1977. Droit et pratique de la fonction publique administratives, 3rd ed, Dalloz.
internationale, Paris. Bibby, Peter. 1995. Effective use of Judicial review, 1st, Exeter.
Wade, E.C.S. and Philips, G. Frey, Constitutional and Craig, P.P. 1980. Administrative law, 3rd ed, Sweet and
Administrative Law, 9th ed, The Chaucer Press, G.B. Maxwell, London.
Waline, Marcel. 1963. Droit administrative, 9th ed, Sirey, Paris. Debbasch, Charles. 1975. Contentieux administratif, Dalloz.
Weber, Yves, 1968. L'Administration Consultative, Paris. Debbasch, Charles, Pinet, Marcel. 1970. Les grands textes
Consultation at the Supreme Court of Justice Judgment

(A Comparative Study)
Khalid Al-Zubadi*
ABSTRACT
Though marked by distinctive characteristics, consultation is considered a formal procedure of
paramount importance in the administrative decision making, and subject to many detailed and ramified
rules and regulations.
The rules and regulaters which govern consultation, and its provisions, and the Supreme Court's say on it
has been studies in light of the tendencies in jurisprudence and comparative administrative judicature.
This research is accomplished in four sections. The first deals with the concept and forms of
consultation, the second focuses on the sources and elements of consultative competence, the third is
devoted to the rules which governs the authenticity of consultation, while the fourth section is dedicated to
the control of consultation by administrative judicature.
It was recommended that a new legislation should be promulgated explaining the general rules of
formulating the consultive commissions and its working mechanism.
Keywords: Consultation, Administrative Law, Administrative Jurisprudences, Administrative
Decision, Comparative Law, Supreme Court of Justice.
________________________________________________
* Faculty of Law, Al-Isra University, Amman, Jordan. Received on 9/8/2006 and Accepted for Publication on 15/4/2007.
- 364 -

408 43466 1 PB

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

408 43466 1 PB

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

‫ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺭﻴﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﻨﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﹼﺩ ‪ ،35‬ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪2008 ،2‬‬

‫ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻀﺎﺀ ﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺩل ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‬

‫ﻭﻻ ﺘﻘﺘﺼﺭ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻓﺤﺴﺏ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﻤــﺔ‬

‫‪- 346 -‬‬

‫‪- 347 -‬‬

‫‪- 348 -‬‬

‫‪- 349 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻭﻯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﺭﻴﻊ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺘﺨﺼﺹ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺠﺎل‬ ‫ﺃﻭﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻲ‪:‬‬

‫‪- 350 -‬‬

‫‪- 351 -‬‬

‫‪- 352 -‬‬

‫‪- 353 -‬‬

‫‪- 354 -‬‬

‫‪- 355 -‬‬

‫‪- 356 -‬‬

‫‪- 357 -‬‬

‫‪- 358 -‬‬

‫ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ – ‪،1992‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻬﻭﺍﻤﺵ‬

‫‪- 359 -‬‬

‫‪- 360 -‬‬

‫‪- 361 -‬‬

‫‪Laubadere, op.cit, p. 296, Auby et Drago, op.cit.‬‬ ‫ﺹ‪.100‬‬

‫‪- 362 -‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺙ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪ 2348‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﺒﻌﺩﻫﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫‪1963, p. 462, Debbasch, Contentioux administrative,‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ ‪ 3‬ﺃﻴﻠﻭل‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺠﻊ‬

‫‪- 363 -‬‬

administratifs, Sirey. ‫ ﺇﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻨﻌﻤﺎﻥ ﺃﺤﻤﺩ‬1997-1972 ‫ﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﻭﻋﺸﺭﻴﻥ ﺴﻨﺔ‬

Consultation at the Supreme Court of Justice Judgment

You might also like