Evaluating abuse of power in administrative decision-making: a psychological and technological analysis of public administration

Abstract

This study examines abuse of power in public administration, the reasons for its persistence in its traditional form, and its adverse impact on the quality of administrative action and the credibility of the principle of legality. It also evaluates the adequacy of the traditional model of the defect of abuse of power in attempting to confront contemporary administrative challenges, and examines the extent to which psychological, organizational, and technological factors may affect administrative deviations. It further explores the role of public administration principles, preventative governance, and digital transformation in developing a framework that may contribute to limiting abuse of power and strengthening the principle of administrative legality. The study adopts a legal-doctrinal analytical method that combines legal rules, including judicial decisions, with principles of management science, through legal analysis, with a view to introducing renewal and rationality into the current theory of abuse of power or deviation of authority, through an evaluative reading of public administration theories relevant to the research problem. The approach found that abuse of power is not merely a legal flaw detected after the fact, but rather a cumulative failure in the decision-making process within the procedural and human structure of the institution. Accordingly, the study proposes a vision to reconstruct the concept through an integrated preventive oversight framework that combines judicial control with proactive administrative mechanisms, while emphasizing that these tools still require testing and development in future research to enhance transparency and trust in administrative action.