Moral Damage from the Perspective of the Libyan Administrative Jurisprudence: A Comparative Study

Abstract

This study addresses the issue of compensation for moral damage in the rulings of the Libyan administrative judiciary, exploring the challenges surrounding its proof and the discretionary power granted to the judge in its assessment. The research employed a descriptive-analytical methodology, establishing the theoretical concepts and conditions of moral damage, and analyzing the legal basis upon which the judiciary relies to award compensation, which is primarily found in the rules of the Civil Code. The first part of the study covered the theoretical framework, while the second part analyzed the discretionary power of the administrative judge in proving the damage and the governing criteria for its assessment. The study concluded with a third, practical part that reviewed case law from the Libyan Supreme Court in disputes related to public service and various other administrative decisions. The study reached several significant findings, most notably that the Libyan administrative judiciary relies on a solid legal foundation with judicial flexibility in its application, plays a positive role in proving damage through judicial presumptions, has developed semi-stable judicial criteria that guide its discretionary power, and has expanded the scope of protection to encompass all aspects of administrative activity. The study concluded by presenting a number of recommendations addressed to the judiciary, the legislature, and researchers.