The Impact of Discretion on Job Interviews: The Presumption of Abuse of Power as a Case Study

Abstract

This study investigates how administrative discretion influences job interviews, analyzing it through the lens of the presumption of abuse of power as a legal model. By employing descriptive and analytical methods, it outlines the legal framework of discretion and examines its practical applications, particularly potential abuses in candidate selection. Structured into an introduction, preface, and four sections, the research defines key terms, explores the presumption of abuse in interviews, examines mechanisms and controls for shortlisting, considers the consequences of failing to shortlist, and reviews judicial applications. The findings emphasize that while discretionary power is essential for serving the public interest and adapting to administrative needs, it remains bound by legality and purpose. The study highlights how varied interview methods both enable committees to assess candidates’ competence and allow scrutiny of the administration’s use of discretion. Ultimately, it affirms that presumptions serve as valid evidence before administrative courts, carrying equal weight to other forms of proof and granting judges the freedom to form convictions based on case circumstances.