APPLICATIONOF ADMINISTRATIVELAW TOPRIVATZATIONS ovide for one or more specal supervisory directors to be appointed by public authorities, mainly the national govemment. This right of appointment is an exeption to the rule that the mem bers of the supervisory board are appointed by the board himself. This opportunity is, according to the law, especially appropriate when the common interest is involvedin the company in aspecal way It is rather obv ious that in cases of privatisation, where the governmentwants to maintain a certain degree of influence this will be the case. So almost all statutory acts by which in the framework of privatisation a company is founded, provide fora possibility forappointing one or more special supervisory board members As to the extent of the influence of the government can have through the speia supervisor one can suppose that there is an inherent tension between the interest of the company as such on which the supervisory board has to focus and the public problem when we discuss the lim its of govemment influence m par. S, aI with this interest which has to be the focus of any public authorith. We will de Ad b. Besides the instrument of the private law on legal persons the govemment can xercise influence by means of specific powers on the basis of public law. Basica lly this is only nessesary when the possibilities inside the private hw are deficient In this sense specific rules based on public law are a complement to the instruments based on private law Obviously the govemment as legislator can and will have a substantive influence, since in the fomal act, that is, as we mentioned before, necessary for founding a private legal body the goal and the tasks of the company will defined and assigned. This assigment implies that the assigned tasks have to be executed. In this sense there is a direct influence of the govemment on the company, which can still be inforced by more detailed regulations and instructions in which cond itions the company has tot fulfil are laid down Where the instruments mentioned above are of a more general character, the govemment can retain also more concrete powers, such as the power to appo int executives, rights of approval of tariffs, the budget. It goes without say ing that the more detailed those regulations and instructions are, the more they might interfere with the descretionary powers of the executive board of the company 5.3 Limits ofgovernment influence 53 1 Within the context of the private lawon legal person When the influence is exercised by using the possibil ities of the private law as elaborated in par 5.2 sub a the basic question te be answered is whether or not the govemment in his role as shareholder or represented by a member of the supervisory board holds a different position. To which extend can the govemment, representing the common interest influence the different decision making bodies in the company, whose decisions all have to be directed on the com panies interest. This comes down to the essential question in which way the common interest and the interest of the company differor(partly )coincide n recent days the interest of the company is regarded to be more than the interest of the shareholders in the maximum retum on their shares. In prevailing opinions theAPPLICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TO PRIVATIZATIONS 9 provide for one or more special supervisory directors to be appointed by public authorities, mainly the nationa l government. This right of appointment is an exeption to the rule that the members of the supervisory board are appointed by the board himself. This opportunity is, according to the law, especially appropriate when the common interest is involvedin the company in aspecial way. It is rather obvious that in cases of privatisation, where the governmentwants to maintain a certain degree of influence this will be the case. So almost all statutory acts by which in the framework of privatisation a company is founded, provide for a possibility for appointing one or more special supervisory board members. As to the extent of the influence of the government can have through the speial supervisor one can suppose that there is an inherent tension between the interest of the company as such on which the supervisory board has to focus and the public interest which has to be the focus of any public authorithy. We will deal with this problem when we discuss the limits of government influence in par. 5.3. Ad b. Besides the instrument of the private law on legal persons the government can exercise influence by means of specific powers on the basis of public law. Basically this is only nessesary when the possibilities inside the private law are deficient. In this sense specific rules based on public law are a complement to the instruments based on private law. Obviously the government as legislator can and will have a substantive influence, since in the formal act, that is, as we mentioned before, necessary for founding a private legal body the goal and the tasks of the company will defined and assigned. This assigment implies that the assigned tasks have to be executed. In this sense there is a direct influence of the government on the company, which can still be inforced by more detailed regulations and instructions in which conditions the company has tot fulfil are laid down. Where the instruments mentioned above are of a more general character, the government can retain also more concrete powers, such as the power to appoint executives, rights of approval of tariffs, the budget. It goes without saying that the more detailed those regulations and instructions are, the more they might interfere with the descretionary powers of the executive board of the company. 5.3 Limits of government influence 5.3.1 Within the context of the private law on legal persons When the influence is exercised by using the possibilities of the private law as elaborated in par 5.2 sub a the basic question te be answered is whether or not the government in his role as shareholder or represented by a member of the supervisory board holds a different position. To which extend can the government, representing the common interest influence the different decision making bodies in the company, whose decisions all have to be directed on the companies interest. This comes down to the essential question in which way the common interest and the interest of the company differ or (partly) coincide. In recent days the interest of the company is regarded to be more than the interest of the shareholders in the maximum return on their shares. In prevailing opinions the