Page 134 - RIMD_4
P. 134
134 R e v u ed el ’ I n s t i t u td uM o n d ee td udéveloppement
of those superior territorial units’ bodies that were established by regional
self-government election in 2001. On the contrary, the opponents of this
proposal reasoned its impracticality through a danger of precedent which
could be misapplied in the future. However, all these proposals failed to at-
tract broad political interest and support. For example, as far as communal
reform, new government elected in 2006 did not refer to it in its program
proclamation; in the case of Košice, on account of strong resistance from
the side of small city parts, this debate lost its way quite soon; and with refe-
rence to prolongation of regional self-government bodies’ term of office,
points emphasized by its opponents turned the scale.
New government that came into power in 2006 has not mentioned conti-
nuation of decentralization processes in its program proclamation. Despite
of Prime Minister’s pledge to reduce 20 percent from overall number of
civil servants, bigger reduction of that number has not been fulfilled yet.
However, the government succeeded in other program proclamation com-
mitment, and elaborated a proposal of act which was consequently appro-
ved by the NRSR and which is to abolish the regional authorities.
At this point it has to be stressed that territorial self-government units are
not so strictly limited by law as other state organs, and therefore their pos-
sibilities within policy-making processes are broader and more diverse in
comparison with those authorities that had realized some of their compe-
tences in the previous time (i.e. before 2002). Besides other possibilities,
they are much more open for international co-operation than any state ad-
ministration authority on sub-national level. Speaking on that, it is possible
to say that the SR lagged behind in creation of conditions for international
co-operation of Slovak territorial self-government units and their bodies
with their foreign partners. They had not been legally created until the first
Mikuláš Dzurinda’s government succeeded in adoption of the European
Chart of Local Self-Government (in SR it has been implementing since
2000), the European Framework Agreement on Cross-Border Co-opera-
tion among Territorial units and Bodies, as well as its 2nd Protocol (in SR
they have been implemented since 2001), and, except for Austria, it entered
into the agreements on cross-border co-operative possibilities with all its
neighbors (Majchrák and Pilát, 2002, p. 50). An effort to create the suitable
conditions for development of cross-border co-operation among the Slo-
vak territorial self-government units and their foreign partners was finally
finished in 2004, when then-government agreed with its Austrian partner
on such an agreement (Klimovský, 2005b, p. 362).
In general, it can be stated that during the whole researched period a low
or insufficient citizens´ awareness regarding public administration and its
activities, and particularly territorial self-government and its activities, has
prevailed. High number of citizens have not distinguished self-government
competences and competences belonging to state and its bodies – typical
o
RIMD–n 4–2013
of those superior territorial units’ bodies that were established by regional
self-government election in 2001. On the contrary, the opponents of this
proposal reasoned its impracticality through a danger of precedent which
could be misapplied in the future. However, all these proposals failed to at-
tract broad political interest and support. For example, as far as communal
reform, new government elected in 2006 did not refer to it in its program
proclamation; in the case of Košice, on account of strong resistance from
the side of small city parts, this debate lost its way quite soon; and with refe-
rence to prolongation of regional self-government bodies’ term of office,
points emphasized by its opponents turned the scale.
New government that came into power in 2006 has not mentioned conti-
nuation of decentralization processes in its program proclamation. Despite
of Prime Minister’s pledge to reduce 20 percent from overall number of
civil servants, bigger reduction of that number has not been fulfilled yet.
However, the government succeeded in other program proclamation com-
mitment, and elaborated a proposal of act which was consequently appro-
ved by the NRSR and which is to abolish the regional authorities.
At this point it has to be stressed that territorial self-government units are
not so strictly limited by law as other state organs, and therefore their pos-
sibilities within policy-making processes are broader and more diverse in
comparison with those authorities that had realized some of their compe-
tences in the previous time (i.e. before 2002). Besides other possibilities,
they are much more open for international co-operation than any state ad-
ministration authority on sub-national level. Speaking on that, it is possible
to say that the SR lagged behind in creation of conditions for international
co-operation of Slovak territorial self-government units and their bodies
with their foreign partners. They had not been legally created until the first
Mikuláš Dzurinda’s government succeeded in adoption of the European
Chart of Local Self-Government (in SR it has been implementing since
2000), the European Framework Agreement on Cross-Border Co-opera-
tion among Territorial units and Bodies, as well as its 2nd Protocol (in SR
they have been implemented since 2001), and, except for Austria, it entered
into the agreements on cross-border co-operative possibilities with all its
neighbors (Majchrák and Pilát, 2002, p. 50). An effort to create the suitable
conditions for development of cross-border co-operation among the Slo-
vak territorial self-government units and their foreign partners was finally
finished in 2004, when then-government agreed with its Austrian partner
on such an agreement (Klimovský, 2005b, p. 362).
In general, it can be stated that during the whole researched period a low
or insufficient citizens´ awareness regarding public administration and its
activities, and particularly territorial self-government and its activities, has
prevailed. High number of citizens have not distinguished self-government
competences and competences belonging to state and its bodies – typical
o
RIMD–n 4–2013
