CC BY
31
THE ESSENCE OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE
© Harutyunyan H.*, Harutyunyan N.
Public Administration Academy of the Republic of Armenia Yerevan State University, Republic of Armenia, Yerevan
This article is dedicated to the one of important term as «self-government» and the essence of community governance. The authors introduced different theories on this issue. There are many arguments about the ways of establishment and development of local self-government in the different countries and comments of existing historical and local traditions in this article.
Keywords: constitution, legislation, state governance, community, local self-government administrative units, independence, administrative-territorial division.
According to a number of authors' theories on the essence of community governance in modern professional literature, the governance of local communities comprises the establishment of state governance in locations as well as the establishment of bodies elected by community residents. The latter is referred to as local self-government as community governance is a constituent part of local governance. Other authors find that there are some contradictions between local governance and local self-government. They define local governance as the implementation of managerial activities by central power within territorial units, which is referred to as territorial administration, whereas local self-government is defined as an activity implemented by community residents of a territorial unit. In other words, this is an activity implemented by the community residents and its elected bodies to resolve issues of local significance.
The above-mentioned facts lead to the point that both local self-government and territorial administration are types of managerial activities which are implemented within separate areas of the country. Thus, both of them are based on administrative-territorial division of the country. The administrative-territorial division is the system of the territorial organization of a country, which presupposes division of county's territory into separate administrative parts, which are referred to as administrative-territorial units, and thus it is based on these units that state or territorial governance bodies as well as local self-government bodies are formed and they operate. It is commonly accepted to distinguish between natural and artificial administrative-territorial units. Natural administrative-territorial units are settlements (villages, boroughs, cities) which have been historically built for inhabitation in favorable conditions (near sources, rivers). People have lived in communities and they have resolved common problems. Thus, it was necessary to find a way of self-organization, that is, to arrange meetings and make deci-
* Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor.
sions, find ways to apply decisions, choose a governing body. Further on, these activities have been legally centralized in countries. This type of governance came to be known as local-self-government. If a country is not too small, then it is also divided into artificial administrative-territorial units, which are called regions, provinces, departments, marzes, districts, etc. Therefore, historical, natural-geographical, social-economic, demographic and ethnic factors should be taken into account in order to apply such a division.
In the course of time administrative units grew in size. It was conditioned by the fact that first-level units were small in terms of size and resource provision and, as a result, they couldn't implement their functions effectively. Another reason for the growth of administrative units is that in the middle of the 20th century large cities, namely agglomerations, appeared and, as a result, neighboring residences united and, thus, one agglomeration was governed by local self-government bodies of different communities. This issue was resolved as administrative units grew in size. However, the growth of administrative units requires the creation of smaller ones. This contradiction can be explained in a very simple way. First, as administrative units grow in size, they withdraw from the society, and, thus, their primary aim of dealing with local problems and demands effectively becomes difficult to implement.
Thus, both territorial administration and community governance systems develop on the basis of administrative-territorial division of the country. On the whole, territorial administration is the state governance of communities which is implemented in administrative-territorial units by the representatives of executive power and their staff. It is also characterized by the following features:
- It has a specific form of establishment. The basic principles of the formation of state bodies are often prescribed by the Constitution of the country.
- It is formed to implement certain functions and objectives of state governance.
- It has powers established by the legislation.
- It has supervisory powers over local self-governments.
- The framework and structure of powers of territorial governing bodies are defined by legal acts.
Territorial administration is developed by the state, whereas community governance is implemented by virtue of the system of elected and formed local self-government bodies which are direclty elected by community residents.
It's remarkable that the concept of local self-goverment was first introduced in England after the revolution in the 17th century. Further on, the term «self-government» was spread in Europe. And, according to German legists it was reformer, Prussian Minister Baron Heinrich von Stein (1757-1831) who introduced the concept of local self-government.
In the European Charter in terms of community governance local self-government is defined as the right and capacity of local self-government bodies to re-
gulate and govern the majority of public affairs within the interests of community residents and acting in accordance with the law and at their own responsibility. It is also defined that this right is exercised not only by the elected local self-government bodies, but also in the form of direct participation of residents in the implementation of community's functions of local self-government. According to the Charter local self-government is the basis of a democratic society, and the principle of local self-government should be recognized in the domestic legislation and to some extent in the constitution of a country. Local self-government also aims to ensure citizens' maximum participation in governing processes. Although countries, which are meant to meet the demands of the society and protect its interests, deal with problems of national significance determining the well-being of every citizen, but the majority of daily problems facing the society are of local significance. Every citizen is concerned with the solution of these problems, and human's standard of living depends on them. As a matter of fact, it is residents who are eager to resolve the problems. In such cases obviously the state obligation to resolve problems of local significance should be necessarily transferred to communities.
At present, the question arises as to what extent community governance is part of state governance and to what extent it is independent. It would be definitely better to estimate the existing systems of local self-government, however, generalizing ideas on community governance it can be concluded that it has a twofold nature. On the one hand, community governance is a part of public administration, however, from the perspective of administration decentralisation and organization it is a distinct part and it is responsible for delivering local services. The latter should be implemented according to national standards with the financial support of central power. In this way, local self-government is supervised by central government. On the other hand, community governance bodies have legitimacy as they are elected by local residents and they have:
- organizational independence (they form their charter);
- staff independence (they deal with staff issues);
- financial independence (the right to define local taxes, duties and payments, and have own financial resources based on them);
- managing material and human resources independently (towards community property and staff);
- legal entity status;
- legal independence (enables to accept acts which have a mandatory legal force in a community);
- urban development independence (enables to establish the construction layout of the territory, etc.).
Although community governance is a branch of public administration, but it is formed by community residents, addresses their interests and reports to them.
The concept of local self-government has been variously defined by different authors. Here are some definitions on the concept of local self-government by a few authors.
According to A.I. Tchercasov community governance is a universal system of public relations which is related to local self-government of residents, solution of problems of local significance, structure and function of local power.
Alderfer H.F. defines community governance as a broad concept, which comprises all the levels of national governance in unitary countries and all the levels of governance below the level of federal subjects in federal countries.
Yakushev A.B. defines community governance as an influence of authorized bodies to resolve problems of local significance in accordance with the law.
Atamanchuk G.V finds that community governance is a democratic form of expression, that is, popular sovereignty, and it should be necessarily viewed in the system of the implementation of the right of democracy and popular sovereignty.
Gradovsky S.D. views community governance as form of power distribution. It is the outcome of various interests, which cannot be addressed by central governing bodies.
Redlich I. finds that community governance is the implementation of legally prescribed responsibilities and powers by the community or by the bodies elected by community residents.
The Constitution of the Russian Federation prescribes that the Russian Federation ensures community governance as the right of residents to resolve local problems independently, manage, maintain and use community property. Community governance is implemented by elections, referendums and other ways of expression of free will, elected local self-government bodies and others.
Local self-government is implemented in urban and rural communities, as well as in other places taking into account historical and local traditions. The structure of local self-government bodies defines population as independent. The solution of the above-mentioned and other problems requires balanced approaches based on the development and use of scientific facts and effective and applied modern methodologies.
References:
1. The Constitution of the Russian Federation.
2. Harutyunyan H.K. Budgeting in Public Administration System. - Yerevan, 2011.
3. Harutyunyan H.K. Budget Process and Financial Stability Evaluation Issues in Local Government System. - Yerevan, 2007.
4. Harutyunyan H.K. Community Budget: Development and Implementation Issues. - Yerevan, 2003.
5. Atamanchuk GV The Theory of State Administration. - M.: Omega-L Publ., 1997.
6. Kovalenko N.E. Local Government as a Form of Democracy. - SPb., 2008.
7. Ordyan E.H. The Principles of Local Self-Governance. - Yerevan, 2000.
8. Tchercasov A.I., Comparative Local Governance: Theory and Practice. -M.: Forum-Infa-M, 1998.
9. Yakushev A.V, State and Municipal Governance. - M.: Prior-Izdat, 2005.
10.Legal and Axiological Aspects of Public Service. - Idealit, Lublin, Poland, 2010.
11. n. Dunn W. Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction. - Third Edition, Pearson Education, Inc. - Upper Saddle River, 2004.
12. Ignatyev VG State and Municipal Governance in the Russian Federation: Theory and Organization. - Rostov-on-Don: MarT; Phoenix, 2010.
ПРОБЛЕМА РЕАЛИЗАЦИИ ПРАВОТВОРЧЕСКОЙ ИНИЦИАТИВЫ
© Логвин Р.Б.*
Башкирский государственный университет, г. Уфа
Ключевые слова: правотворческая инициатива, местное самоуправление, народовластие.
Проблема реализации правотворческой инициативы граждан продолжает оставаться одним из наиболее актуальных вопросов в теории и практике современного права. На сегодняшний день реализация правотворческой инициативы приобретает особую значимость, поскольку степень эффективности указанного института является одним из основных показателей уровня демократического развития государства. Это связано с тем, что сегодня концептуальное развитие демократического режима сводится к расширению реальных возможностей граждан по осуществлению народовластия, которое декларировано многонациональному народу Российской Федерации в ст. 3 основного закона государства. Так, Н.И. Глазунова, пишет «что если нет прямого народовластия, волеизъявления граждан в муниципальном образовании, то нет и местного самоуправления» [1]. Иными словами, вопросы местного значения, входящие в компетенцию органов местного самоуправления, должны осуществляться на основе реализации правотворческой инициативы граждан, которая, в свою очередь, объективно отражает необходимые в современной социальной реальности преобразования.
Однако, вполне очевидно, что формальная закрепленность права граждан на выдвижение правотворческой инициативы не означает отсутствие как правовых, так и социально-экономических препятствий для ее реализации.
Таким образом, актуальность заявленной темы обусловлена не только необходимостью теоретического исследования института правотворческой инициативы на предмет нахождения законодательных несовершенств дан-
* Студент 2 курсаа факультета «Юриспруденция».
