Administrative sanctions procedure and reasoning of sanctions decisions

Resumo

This paper analyses the reasoning of administrative sanctioning decisions from a comparative perspective between Spanish and Salvadoran law. Although the duty to give reasons is widely recognised as a constitutional guarantee and a requirement of validity of administrative acts, both legal systems still show significant ambiguities regarding its content, scope and practical fulfillment. Jurisprudence in both jurisdictions has tended to reduce the duty of reasoning to a concise explanation of the decision, without providing clear criteria for assessing its sufficiency. Against this background, this paper first situates administrative sanctioning power and procedure as the normative and functional framework within the duty to give reasons operates. It then critically examines whether the current standard of reasoning in administrative sanctioning decisions is satisfactory in Spain and El Salvador. Finally, drawing on legal argumentation theory, the paper proposes a set of substantive criteria aimed at strengthening the reasoning of sanctioning decisions, particularly with regard to the justification of facts and the evaluation of evidence.