Abstract

In this work, I argue that administrative discretional decision-making, achieving a public interest to protect, is an evaluation process that occurs through the reasonable and proportional comparison of several private (secondary) interests conflicting with a single public (primary) interest. I suggest that the dynamics of weighing competing interests are similar to the procedure for balancing constitutional rights. Thus, drawing on Robert Alexy's constitutional balancing model, I propose a model that is applicable to discretionary administrative decisions, in which the outcome of the proportional weighing of secondary interests works as a "moderation factor" for the primary interest. In my model, the outcomes of the discretional process can be converted into numerical values, simplifying decision consistency so as to make it simple, complete and reasonable at the same time.