Assessing judicial accountability of the regulatory state: a comparative study of 100 agencies from the energy and telecommunications sectors

Comparative research that studies the accountability of the regulatory state has focused on assessing the varieties of formal and non-hierarchical provisions of accountability of regulatory agencies. Nevertheless, very little is known about the role and varieties of judicial controls available to hold agencies accountable in different jurisdictions. Using a sample of 100 agencies, this paper conducts a comparative assessment of the 'intensity' of judicial review available for judges to supervise the legality of regulatory decisions in the electricity, gas and telecommunications sectors. Findings show differentiated intensity patterns of judicial review across agencies, and suggest that this variation is explained by the 'mediated legitimacy' role of judicial controls, which are necessary for regulatory agencies to fulfill their tasks under a legitimate framework of action. These results offer a better understanding of the political role of judicial accountability as a provision of democratic legitimacy of the regulatory state in different institutional environments.