THE LEGAL VALUE of the UNDECIDED UNILATERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ACTS "COMPARATIVE STUDY".

Unilateral administrative acts under whatever name (preparatory procedures, generalizations, or directive principles), are considered as orders issued by an administrative body aiming at interpreting laws and explaining the way should laws be applied and executed. Although, these laws are issued by a unilateral will of the administrative body, and founded similar with the administrative decisions in terms of the formality and purport, they are found different as the administrative act does not produce legal implications, unlike the administrative decision, they cannot be challenged through a lawsuit for cancellation unless they result in an important legal effect that justifies. As the modern administration has become a complicated issue, and it has become difficult for the ordinary employee to initiate in making decisions and hold the liability arises from cases and issues in questions. Thus, the presidential power has taken the role in making a simple and clear framework for the relations between subordinate employees and those who deal with the general facility, via manners and procedures called unilateral administrative acts that the administration cannot ignore and considered as the prime key- player in the administrative act. In doing so, the administration has a wide discretionary power in issuing these acts. Unilateral administrative acts are divided upon three types, preparatory procedures that pave the way for the administration to issue the final decision, generalizations that are issued in a form of newsletters and instructions that include recommendations, rules and interest orders issued by ministers and managers for their employees. Finally, directive principles which are procedures made by the administrative power aiming at organizing and regulating the general facility to ensure performance of the service in a best way. This study concluded with significant findings to include that the undecided unilateral administrative acts do not produce legal effects directly; therefore, they are not subject to appeal via revocation lawsuit unless it arranges crucial legal effects aiming at simplifying their judicial reviews. These acts have gone through a remarkable historical development recently which led to be subject to the judicial review. Also, new patterns of these acts have emerged in the French State Council as directive principles which suit with the legislative and judicial occurred in this regards. This study has also concluded with a number of pivotal recommendations, to include that the Iraqi Administrative Judiciary is recommended to follow a united determined judicial policy and specify certain norms to distinguish between these acts and administrative decisions, and to put a precise definition for the undecided unilateral administrative acts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]