Page 89 - RIMD_2012_3
P. 89
Revue de l’Institut du Monde et du Développement | 89
The time for territorial simplification has come even though, for a large na-
tional territory, this may be more complicated; however the case of Japan,
with only two local levels for nearly 130 million inhabitants, proves that this
is possible….
3) In order to achieve this simplification, we have a solution: the mixture of
local autonomy and deconcentration.It is possible, for example, in Romania,
to re-create “Regions” and, inside thereof, to divide each regional territory
and to create, in each sub-regional territory, an operational administration.
The same solution may be used in France: this would be an opportunity to
have only a single strategic level over an important territory, and different
operational administrations inside it, as it happens in a Federal State…
The strategic level will be at the regional level. We must centralize local
powers but we must not forget the importance of administrative democracy.
Therefore, it is important to protect the political concentration and to defend
the operational democracy…
4) The possible recognition of a wardship among local authorities. At last
but not least, it is very important to increase opportunities for each “higher
local level” (the Region) in order to control the “subordinate territorial lev-
els” (bodies for the cooperation within “communes” or for the cooperation
among “communes”).
Moreover, paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the Charter also states that the full and
exclusive jurisdiction of local authorities “may not be undermined or limited
by another central or regional authority except as provided for by the law”.
By failing to clearly specify the status of the owner of this “limitation”, this
suggests that the corresponding supervision procedure may be exercised by
both the central government or by another local authority, even by a national
or local administrative authority, independent of these other public entities.
However, and having regard to the text that follows, the reference to a regu-
lar monitoring authority seems to refer to a deconcentrated authority (i.e., the
central government) at regional level. Nonetheless, the Charter does not ex-
pressly prohibit any form of control of one local authority by another. This
would be useful in order to avoid some financial waste and the proliferation
of local legal norms with the related risk of contradiction...
B. A Question of Means
1) The need for a real fiscal independence of local authorities in Europe. We
must establish a tax system ensuring the autonomy of local authorities in
relation to the State. Section 9 of the European Charter of Self-Government,
entitled “the financial resources of local authorities", envisages, at length, the
RIMD – n o 3 – 2012
The time for territorial simplification has come even though, for a large na-
tional territory, this may be more complicated; however the case of Japan,
with only two local levels for nearly 130 million inhabitants, proves that this
is possible….
3) In order to achieve this simplification, we have a solution: the mixture of
local autonomy and deconcentration.It is possible, for example, in Romania,
to re-create “Regions” and, inside thereof, to divide each regional territory
and to create, in each sub-regional territory, an operational administration.
The same solution may be used in France: this would be an opportunity to
have only a single strategic level over an important territory, and different
operational administrations inside it, as it happens in a Federal State…
The strategic level will be at the regional level. We must centralize local
powers but we must not forget the importance of administrative democracy.
Therefore, it is important to protect the political concentration and to defend
the operational democracy…
4) The possible recognition of a wardship among local authorities. At last
but not least, it is very important to increase opportunities for each “higher
local level” (the Region) in order to control the “subordinate territorial lev-
els” (bodies for the cooperation within “communes” or for the cooperation
among “communes”).
Moreover, paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the Charter also states that the full and
exclusive jurisdiction of local authorities “may not be undermined or limited
by another central or regional authority except as provided for by the law”.
By failing to clearly specify the status of the owner of this “limitation”, this
suggests that the corresponding supervision procedure may be exercised by
both the central government or by another local authority, even by a national
or local administrative authority, independent of these other public entities.
However, and having regard to the text that follows, the reference to a regu-
lar monitoring authority seems to refer to a deconcentrated authority (i.e., the
central government) at regional level. Nonetheless, the Charter does not ex-
pressly prohibit any form of control of one local authority by another. This
would be useful in order to avoid some financial waste and the proliferation
of local legal norms with the related risk of contradiction...
B. A Question of Means
1) The need for a real fiscal independence of local authorities in Europe. We
must establish a tax system ensuring the autonomy of local authorities in
relation to the State. Section 9 of the European Charter of Self-Government,
entitled “the financial resources of local authorities", envisages, at length, the
RIMD – n o 3 – 2012
