Conceptual and Doctrinal Interactions of Administrative Sanctions in EU Public Administration

Purpose: The study aims to map and analyse the emergence of the concept of administrative sanctions in EU legislation and case law and in the national systems of individual Member States, and to examine their interaction. It also seeks to clarify which types of administrative measures are increasingly subject to criminal law guarantees.Design/Methodology/Approach: The study conducts a comparative doctrinal and historical analysis of four national legal systems (Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Hungary), alongside a review of relevant EU legislation (e.g. the GDPR), CJEU and ECtHR case law (e.g. Engel, Jussila and recent ne bis in idem cases) and key academic debates. It formulates a thesis on the causal mechanisms linking the EU and its Member States (i.e. legislation, judicial interpretation, national doctrinal influences and practice) and tests it against selected influential legal provisions and landmark cases.Findings: EU legislation and judicial practice have had a normative effect, further narrowing the doctrinal gap between administrative and criminal sanctions. The case law of the CJEU and ECtHR, together with EU regulatory instruments, is bringing deterrent administrative measures closer to criminal law and its guarantees, while restorative measures continueto fall outside the scope of criminal law protection. National systems influence this process indirectly. In Germany, tensions between legal institutionscoexist with adaptive responses. In France, judicially shaped pluralism is evident. In the United Kingdom, regulation has shifted towards a diverse range of administrative measures. In Hungary, a hybrid and changing system is being considered. Tensions, such as the conflict between the GDPR and national law, illustrate the practical problems of doctrinal fragmentation.Practical Implications: To ensure procedural guarantees without hindering effective enforcement, policymakers and courts need to clarify conceptual boundaries. Practical options include reconsidering the Engel criteria and the test for determining whether a sanction is 'criminal', and developing an EU-wide sanctions charter or code.Originality/Value: The study synthesises different systems by linking EU instruments and case law with specific national developments, a perspective that has received little attention in EU administrative studies. By distinguishing between restorative and punitive measures and proposing a clear causal link between EU influence and policy options, it contributes to efforts to enhance conceptual clarity, harmonise sanctioning practices and protect fundamental rights.