The paper examines the exceptions and discretionary powers exercised by the officers of the Ministry of Transport and Telecommunication in the provision of services, licenses granting and approvals, including the powers prescribed in Traffic Law No. (5) of 2000, as amended, and its executive regulations and other systems applicable by the Ministry as well as relevant procedural manuals.
The analysis showed that the broadest powers in this regard are vested in the Licensing Authority, the Transport Professions Certification Authority, the Traffic Controller, and, subsequently, the Minister. It also found that the Vehicle Ownership Transfer Regulation and the Decision Regulating Private Transport Services procedurally restricted the issuance of certain licenses through mechanisms such as needs assessment, public announcement, lottery procedures, and multiple approval requirements. However, they continued to leave wide discretionary powers in determining transport needs, granting exemptions from the lottery process, amending or revoking licenses, and imposing license conditions and administrative sanctions. These risks increase when the applicable criteria are not formally documented or when decisions are not supported by adequate justification, record-keeping, and review procedures.
The interviews further confirmed the absence of a unified framework for recording exemptions, a standardized application form for requesting them, and a central register for exemption decisions. They also revealed continued reliance on guidelines and administrative instructions that are outdated, unofficial, or unpublished. In addition, cases were identified where the requirements for public announcement, lottery procedures, or eligibility criteria were bypassed, while other exceptions were driven by extraordinary circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the war, and displacement. This highlights the need to distinguish between a temporary, justified public-interest exemption and an individual exemption that grants a private benefit and therefore requires stricter oversight.
The Ministry is currently moving toward ending unregulated exemptions, reviewing the legislative framework, involving additional authorities in certain decision-making processes, automating licensing and transport services, and referring suspected corruption cases to the Anti-Corruption Commission. The paper recommends translating these efforts into sustainable institutional rules by clearly defining the concepts of public interest and justifiable grounds, publishing the methodology for transport needs assessments, regulating license amendments and administrative penalties, adopting a unified electronic application form and central registry, requiring reasoned and documented decisions, updating and publishing all applicable manuals and guidelines, and ensuring access to objection, appeal, and oversight mechanisms.
