SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
114
THE IMPACT OF THE PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH ON THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF ADMINISTRATIVE GOVERNANCE
Nurmuxamedova Diyora Farxodovna
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16527995
Introduction
In public administration, few principles are as foundational yet under-
discussed as the principle of good faith. Commonly associated with private law
(contracts and civil dealings), the idea of good faith has increasingly permeated
administrative law as a guiding norm for both government authorities and
citizens. Good faith in the administrative context broadly means that public
officials and institutions must act honestly, fairly, and consistently, without
abusing their power or misleading the public. It also implies that citizens
engaging with the administration should do so sincerely and without fraudulent
intent. In essence, “Good faith constitutes a general principle of law”, referring to
“a sense of loyalty to, and respect for, the law; the absence of dissimulation,
deception and fraud; and the sincere belief that one acts in accordance with the
law”. While historically rooted in moral and civil law concepts, good faith is now
recognized in many jurisdictions as an integral principle of public law. For
example, the Constitution of Switzerland explicitly guarantees citizens the right
to be treated by authorities in good faith, and conversely requires citizens and
government bodies to deal with each other in good faith. This thesis examines
the principle of good faith in administrative law – its definition and origins, how
it influences administrative decision-making and procedural fairness, and how it
fosters trust in governance. By drawing on theory, legal provisions (such as
Uzbekistan’s administrative law) and international examples, we will illustrate
how the good faith principle impacts the quality and effectiveness of
administrative governance.
Good Faith in Administrative Decision-Making
In practical terms, the principle of good faith profoundly influences
administrative decision-making. For public officials, acting in good faith means
making decisions based on lawful, public-regarding reasons – not for personal
gain, not to unfairly harm someone, and not on the basis of hidden agendas. An
administrative decision made in bad faith (for example, to punish a political
opponent under the guise of regulation, or to favor a friend contrary to merit) is
considered a serious abuse of power in many legal systems and can be
invalidated by courts. In other words, good faith acts as a check on the exercise
of discretion by officials. Most administrative law systems provide that when
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
115
discretion is given to an agency or official, it must be used to promote the
purpose of the law and the public interest, not for ulterior motives. Uzbekistan’s
Administrative Procedures Law explicitly codifies this in the “principle of
legality of administrative discretion,” requiring that discretionary powers be
exercised within legal bounds and according to their intended purpose. An
authority that wields its discretion in a way that betrays the intent of the law
(for instance, denying a permit not because the applicant fails legal criteria but
because the official dislikes the applicant) would violate the good faith principle
as well as legality. Good faith also means decision-makers should be truthful and
transparent in their dealings. If an agency provides information or reasons to a
citizen, those should be accurate and complete to the best of the agency’s
knowledge. Deliberate misinformation by a public authority is a classic case of
bad faith. For example, if a planning office tells a permit applicant that their
project is approved, only to later rescind it without cause, the applicant could
claim the agency acted in bad faith. In jurisdictions recognizing good faith, such
behavior might lead to the decision’s reversal or even liability for the agency. In
some countries, there is a formal duty to give reasons for administrative
decisions – this ties to good faith by ensuring that the real reasons are stated,
preventing officials from acting on undisclosed (and possibly improper)
grounds. A “reasoned decision” requirement compels sincerity and discourages
arbitrary action. Moreover, consistency in decision-making is a facet of good
faith. Agencies are generally expected to follow their own established policies or
precedents unless there is a valid reason to change course. If an agency suddenly
deviates from a long-standing practice without warning or justification, affected
individuals may argue that the agency acted without good faith, especially if they
had come to expect a certain treatment. That does not mean agencies can never
change policies – but under good faith principles, significant changes should be
forward-looking (not retroactively punishing those who relied on the old policy)
and should be well-explained. As noted in Uzbekistan’s law, any change in
administrative practice must be justified by public interest and be applied in a
general, stable manner. This requirement ensures that decision-making remains
predictable and reliable, two qualities which are essential for effective
governance. When officials follow good faith, their decisions are more likely to
be viewed as legitimate and thus face less resistance from the public. Finally,
good faith in decision-making serves as a defense for public officials who
genuinely strive to do right. Many legal systems differentiate between errors
made in good faith and acts done maliciously or negligently. For instance, an
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
116
official might incorrectly interpret a regulation and be later overturned by a
court – if it was an honest mistake in good faith, the consequences (in terms of
liability or disciplinary action) are typically less severe than if the official had
willfully ignored the law. This nuance encourages officials to act diligently but
without paralyzing fear of every error, provided they are acting sincerely and
lawfully.
Mutual Trust and Governance Quality
One of the most profound impacts of the principle of good faith is the
cultivation of mutual trust between the government and the public, which in
turn affects overall governance quality. Effective administrative governance
relies on a degree of voluntary compliance and cooperation from the populace.
Citizens pay taxes, follow regulations, and participate in public programs in part
because they trust that the government is acting fairly and in good faith. When
this trust is present, governance is smoother: people are more likely to report
information truthfully, less likely to engage in evasion or litigation, and more
willing to accept tough policy measures because they believe authorities are
acting in the public’s best interest. Good faith is instrumental in building this
trust. If people consistently observe that officials keep their promises, admit and
correct mistakes, and do not exploit their power, a reservoir of goodwill
accumulates. For example, consider how a business might interact with a
licensing agency: if the agency historically has been honest and helpful (good
faith behavior), the business will approach new regulations with less cynicism
and more willingness to comply. Conversely, if the agency has a reputation of
unpredictability or hidden agendas (violating good faith), businesses may react
with suspicion, looking for ways around the rules or challenging decisions at
every turn. As one analysis notes, “if the public does not trust the government
and does not cooperate with the government, the work of the administrative
organ will not be carried out.” Trust is thus a lubricant for governance; good
faith is what generates and maintains that trust. Empirical governance studies
also suggest that where citizens perceive the government as fair and acting in
good faith, there is higher compliance with laws and a lower incidence of
corruption at the street level. The reason is intuitive: officials who internalize
good faith will treat citizens respectfully and not solicit bribes or engage in
favoritism, and citizens who trust the system are less likely to resort to illicit
means to get things done. In this way, good faith in administration helps combat
corruption and inefficiency by aligning the behavior of both officials and citizens
with the formal rules and ethical norms. Moreover, at the macro level, the
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
117
principle of good faith contributes to the stability and legitimacy of governance.
Governments that frequently break promises, change rules retroactively, or act
inconsistently soon face a crisis of credibility. Businesses hesitate to invest, and
citizens may protest or disobey out of frustration. A scholarly reflection on
reliance interests in governance put it starkly: frequent administrative about-
faces “will not only lead to the loss of trust in the government by the people and
damage the credibility and integrity of the government, but also [are] not
conducive to the long-term stability of the country and the construction of [a]
rule of law government.”. In other words, governance without good faith begets
instability. On the other hand, when a government is known for keeping its word
and treating people above-board, it earns a legitimacy that can endure even
through difficult times or unpopular decisions. The people may give the
government the “benefit of the doubt” in a crisis if past behavior has shown good
faith.
Conclusion
The principle of good faith, once mainly a private law doctrine, has emerged
as a vital element of administrative law and good governance. It compels public
authorities to act honestly, fairly, and consistently, and in doing so it protects
citizens’ trust in the government. By examining both theoretical underpinnings
and practical applications, we see that good faith permeates many aspects of
governance: it shapes how decisions are made (with integrity and proper
purpose), how procedures are carried out (with fairness and respect for
expectations), and how officials and citizens relate to each other (with mutual
trust). A government that embraces good faith in its administration is more
likely to achieve legitimacy and effectiveness. Its policies will face less resistance
because people perceive them as just; its civil service will behave ethically,
reducing corruption and errors; and it will build a resilient trust with the public
that can withstand challenges. As one commentator noted, strict adherence to
protecting reliance and acting consistently “is conducive to winning the trust
and recognition of the public…and facilitates [authorities] carrying out
administrative affairs”. In contrast, a government that disregards good faith –
that frequently deceives, breaks promises, or plays “gotcha” with rules – will
struggle as cynicism and non-cooperation take hold, crippling administrative
capacity. In the Uzbek context, the codification of good faith principles like trust
protection in the Administrative Procedures Law is a forward-thinking step that,
if implemented, could greatly improve governance quality by ensuring stability
and fairness in administrative actions. Internationally, the trend toward
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
118
recognizing citizens’ right to good administration (which includes good faith
treatment) reflects a global convergence on this issue. The principle of good faith
thus serves as both an ethical compass and a practical tool in public
administration. It reminds us that at the heart of governance are relationships –
between the state and individuals, among branches of government, and between
different levels of administration – and that these relationships function best
when founded on honesty and trust. In conclusion, the impact of the principle of
good faith on administrative governance is overwhelmingly positive: it enhances
procedural justice, bolsters the rule of law, and builds the trust that is
indispensable for effective public administration. As governments and societies
continue to evolve, embedding good faith in administrative law and practice will
remain a cornerstone of democratic and accountable governance, ensuring that
power is exercised, as it should be, in the service of the people and in accordance
with the law.
References:
1.
Laws and Regulations
2.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Electronic Government" (No. ZRU-
395, 2015).
3.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Administrative Procedures" (No.
ZRU-457, 2018).
4.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Openness of the Activities of State
Authorities and Management" (2014).
5.
Regulation on the Single Portal of Interactive Public Services (SPIPS) of
Uzbekistan (2013, updated 2021).
6.
Institutional Reports
7.
World Bank. (2022). GovTech Maturity Index: Assessing Digital
Transformation in the Public Sector. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
8.
Academic Sources
9.
Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2020). Administration by algorithm: Public
management meets public sector automation. Information Polity, 25(4), 443–
458.
10.
Gil-Garcia, J.R., Dawes, S.S., & Pardo, T.A. (2018). Digital government and
public management research: Finding the crossroads. Public Management
Review, 20(5), 633–646.
