Global Rule of Law: Between Global Administrative Law and Multilevel Constitutionalism.

In order to pursue regulatory aims and reduce economic risks and market failures, States have been using a significant number of administrative rules and procedures in international trade. Today, examples of trade-related administrative rules can be found in many different spheres, such as environmental protection, customs organization, food labelling, financial and banking services, air and maritime navigation, agriculture, migration or energy sources. This dense network of regulatory rules composes the 'global regulatory system' or the 'global administrative space'. A side effect of the eruption of the 'global administrative space' in the global scenario is the loss of power of the traditional domestic accountability mechanisms, such as the parliamentary and the judicial controls, and the growth of democracy or legitimacy deficits. For this reason, one has to find alternative mechanisms to improve accountability inside the global regulatory system and among its actors. National or Global Administrative Law mechanisms, rules and principles - albeit vital - are only a partial instrument for the promotion of good governance at the transnational level. The construction of a 'Global Administrative Law' without a parallel and complementary 'Global Constitutional Law' may indicate a certain disregard for the important role of independent parliamentary (rulemaking) and judicial (adjudication) functions in the accountability of trade policies in the global sphere, particularly so within the context of the human rights and fundamental freedoms paradigm. The notion of 'multilevel constitutionalism' was born precisely to answer to the necessity of multilayered governance in the 'global regulatory system'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]