COURSE WORK
Formation and development of forms of direct democracy in local self-government
Introduction
Relevance.Direct or immediate democracy is primarily a social category. It cannot exist outside of society and is realized only in the system of relations between people. Being a social category, direct democracy presupposes the existence of equal opportunities and conditions for self-development, satisfaction of various material and spiritual interests of citizens, the desire to achieve social justice, spiritual freedom and independence.
Direct democracy as the power of the people is a political category. It characterizes the corresponding form of the state, political regime, political values, political movement. The combination of these two characteristics makes it possible to define democracy as a whole as a new socio-political system that marks the transition from a traditional, feudal and aristocratic society to a society of equal opportunities.
Direct democracy is a legal category. The values that make up the content of direct democracy, the totality of institutions, management procedures that ensure the functioning of the entire political system in the interests of their implementation, objectively need legislative and, above all, constitutional consolidation.
What is common to direct democracy in the social, political and legal aspects lies in the nature that unites them, in a single root, which is "the general social need for self-organization, self-government and self-regulation, the need to streamline the relationship between the individual and society."
The relevance of the research topic is due to the role and place of direct democracy in the system local government. This is the lowest level of public authority, as close as possible to the population, the reform of which faces the same complex of subjective difficulties as the entire modernization process of the Russian political system as a whole. The change in the paradigm of local government, carried out in Russia in the last decade of the 20th century, necessitated the development of new scientific ideas that substantiate the formation and development of institutions of direct democracy at the local level. The study of the problems of direct democracy, its place in the system of local self-government, is an important condition for determining the main patterns of development of civil society in Russia, increasing the effectiveness of its impact on political, economic and social relations.
The purpose of the studyis the study of the process of formation and development of forms of direct democracy in local government.
Research objectives:
1.Consider the concept and forms of direct democracy;
2.On the example of the Federal Law on general principles organizations of local self-government in the Russian Federation in 2003 to consider the formation and development of forms of direct democracy in local self-government.
Object of study -social relations that develop over the content, implementation mechanism, political and legal nature, theoretical foundations direct democracy in the system of local self-government, as well as the problems of legal regulation and the practice of applying specific institutions of direct democracy at the local level.
Subject of studyare the legal norms governing these legal relations.
Methodological basis of the studyconstitute general scientific methods knowledge, as well as private science. Methods were used: materialistic dialectics, comparative, sociological and others.
By structureThe work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of references. The first chapter of the work discusses the concept of direct democracy in general, its forms on the example of the laws of several countries.
The second chapter examines the formation and development of forms of direct democracy in local self-government on the example of the Federal Law on General Principles of Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation of 2003.
In conclusion, conclusions are drawn on the work.
When writing a term paper, normative legal acts, educational and scientific literature, articles, publications.
1. The concept and forms of direct (direct) democracy
Direct (immediate) democracy is a form of direct expression of the will of the people or any groups of the population. Further in the text we will use the term "direct democracy", since this is the most correct from a scientific point of view.
The concept of direct democracy and its forms developed gradually, and scientists from different countries focused on its various aspects.
Democracy is direct, say professors A. and F. Demichel and M. Pikemal, if the people govern themselves, at their meetings, if there is no difference between the rulers and the ruled. On the contrary, it is representative if the citizens exercise their sovereignty only through the election of representatives, who then govern on their behalf.
The prevalence of representative democracy is attributed by the authors to technical reasons. It is impossible for all members of society to take part in governance, they argue. The problem lies not in the choice between representative or direct democracy, but in clarifying the "scope" of direct democracy.
From a political point of view, bourgeois democracy has always been extremely reserved about the direct participation of the population in government. The arguments about the elements of "semi-direct" democracy sound very interesting. Under this term, they explain, the classical theory understands the introduction of a number of institutions that ensure the direct participation of the people in governance while maintaining a representative system as a whole, but in reality it comes down to some institutions, the practical significance of which, according to scientists, is very small.
In some cases, the people participate together with its representatives in deciding questions of a legislative or constitutional order: it may have either the right to initiate legislation or the right to veto (in the latter case, the disagreement of a part of the population with the law adopted by our representatives requires consultation with the whole people in order to clarify should this law come into force).
In other cases, the right to decide is transferred to the people either partially (a popular referendum to approve what was done by representatives, this institution is especially often used in the revision of constitutions), or in full, when representatives are completely excluded from participating in the decision of the issue submitted to the referendum (the case provided for by Article 11 of the current Constitution of France).
Conrad Hesse speaks of the interconnectedness of the two forms of democracy: “The political dominance of parliament and government is a domination, confidentially limited by the majority of the people, responsible, urgent and expedient, subject to criticism and control, modified and supplemented by the participation of the people in the political formation of the will.”
Konrad Hesse identifies several forms of direct political will of the people: firstly, these are parliamentary elections, secondly, voting during a plebiscite or referendum, and thirdly, through special bodies.
In general, he considers elections to be the core of a democratic system due to the fact that the whole people participate in them, and also because the procedure for elections is determined by the principles of freedom and equality. Only when elections are free, K. Hesse notes, do they become legitimizing, only then all deputies of the people have the right to vote, when all votes are equal and there is equal suffrage as the main condition of modern democracy.
The constitution, according to K. Hesse, makes it possible to form public opinion capable of opposing the opinions of parliament, government and administration and capable of gaining significant influence, which allows the people to influence political life beyond elections.
Unions and parties in modern conditions are also necessary factors for the democratic expression of will, therefore Art. 9 of the Basic Law of Germany enshrines the right to form unions and societies, and Art. 21 establishes that the parties contribute to the formation of the political will of the people. Parties that, by their goals or the behavior of their supporters, seek to damage the foundations of a free democratic order, or eliminate it, or endanger the existence of the Federal Republic, are unconstitutional, - says paragraph 2 of Art. 21.
K. Hesse refers to another form of direct political will formation of a referendum, which takes place within the framework of the constitutional order, provided for in paragraph 2 of Art. 20 of the German Basic Law. The institutions of a plebiscite and a referendum, he notes, are limited only to the question of the reorganization of the federation and are regulated by Art. 29 and 118 of the German Constitution.
Thanks to the right to freedom of opinion, enshrined in Art. 5 of the Basic Law of Germany, an important mechanism for their correction is being created with the help of “special bodies” provided for in paragraph 3 of Art. 20, according to the author. To make it clear what is at stake, it is advisable to quote from Art. twenty:
(2) All state power comes from the people. It is carried out by the people through elections and votes and through special bodies of legislation, executive power and justice.
(3) Legislation is bound by the constitutional system, executive power and justice - by law and law.
Thus, summing up the analysis, we can draw the following conclusions:
All forms of direct democracy contribute to the revitalization political life any country.
Specific gravity and the meaning of each of the forms of democracy are different and depend on a variety of national, historical, political and other circumstances characteristic of each society.
The significance of this form of democracy is so great that virtually all modern constitutions contain provisions on forms of direct democracy. Elections are the most common form of direct democracy.
Elections in constitutional law are usually understood as the participation of citizens in the exercise of the power of the people by selecting representatives from their midst by voting to perform functions in the exercise of power in state bodies or local governments.
Various bodies are formed through elections state power- parliaments, presidents, heads of administrations, judicial authorities, as well as local governments. In the United States, for example, the president and vice president, both houses of the United States Congress, state governments, including governors, lieutenant governors, and members of legislatures, county councils, municipal councils, special district councils, and state and at the local level, including judges, district attorneys and representatives of law enforcement agencies (sheriffs, police medical examiners - coroners D, etc.).
Constitutions, as a rule, fix the main principles of suffrage, determine the range of subjects of suffrage, the main principles on which it should be built, the conditions for granting and depriving suffrage. Moreover, the scope of constitutional regulation is quite different. Some constitutions are limited to separate disparate articles, while others introduce special chapters or sections on elections. For example, Art. 48 of the Italian Constitution declares that all citizens who have reached the age of majority, men and women, enjoy the right to vote, and voting is characterized as personal, equal, free and secret. The constitution provides that voting in Italy is a public duty. The Greek Constitution contains chapters on the procedure for electing the President of the Republic and the Chamber of Deputies. Paragraph 3 of Art. 51 of this Constitution establishes that deputies are elected by direct, universal and secret suffrage by citizens who have the right to vote, and the law may restrict the right to vote only on the basis of a minimum age, civil incapacity, or as a result of conviction for certain serious criminal offenses. The constitutional provisions are developed in detail in electoral laws, regulations of the chambers of legislative (representative) authorities and other normative acts.
Suffrage and elections are the most important element of the political life of any country, also because with their help legitimation of power takes place.
The most important form of direct democracy is the referendum.
A referendum is a nationwide poll in which all citizens of the state who have voting rights take part. It is held on particularly important issues of state or public life.
In constitutional law, there are several types of referendum: a) imperative and consultative; b) constitutional and legislative; c) mandatory and optional; d) national and local.
In an imperative referendum, the will of the people is expressed in the adoption of a decision that has important legal force and is valid throughout the country.
A consultative referendum aims to identify public opinion, which is taken into account by public authorities in the process of adopting a law or other important decision.
The division of the referendum into constitutional and legislative is based on legal nature adopted acts: the constitution or the law.
A referendum is considered binding when the body that appoints it is obliged, under the conditions specified by the constitution, to schedule its holding. In case of an optional referendum, on the contrary, the competent state body, at its own discretion, decides on the issue of calling a referendum.
Referendums can be held either at the initiative of the highest legislative bodies (for example, Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Bulgaria), or at the initiative of the president (France, Greece).
The attitude to the referendum is also different. For example, in the United States there is no federal legislation on referenda, and at the level of individual states they are mainly advisory, deliberative, and not mandatory. This is due to the fact that the Americans consider holding referendums inexpedient, because in these cases, in their opinion, representative bodies are replaced, which means that they are no longer responsible for the decision being made. In addition, there is a fear of incompetent resolution of issues at referendums and the substitution of populism for professionalism.
In addition, Americans are against holding referendums because of their high cost.
In accordance with paragraph 6 of Art. 29 of the Basic Law in Germany provides for the possibility of holding a referendum, a popular poll and a popular initiative. The details of their conduct are regulated by the Federal Law on the procedure for a referendum, popular initiative and popular poll of July 30, 1979. In accordance with this law, the first section of which is devoted to the referendum, it is established that the subject of the referendum is the law on a new territorial division. It determines the procedure for holding a referendum and the procedure for the formation of a new land or land within new borders.
The second section of the law is devoted to popular initiative and establishes that in a limited area with interconnected settlements and the economy, if its separate parts are located in several lands, and the population is not less than one million people, the procedure of popular initiative can be carried out. At the same time, the popular initiative is aimed at ensuring that the territory of the new zoning acquires a single land ownership.
The subject of the popular poll in accordance with Section Three of the Federal Law is the adoption of a law that proposes a change in the belonging of territories to one or another land. The respondent must answer whether he agrees with the proposed change of the territory to one or another land or would like to maintain its former status.
Thus, all three direct forms of democracy provided for by the law of the Federal Republic of Germany: a referendum, a people's initiative and a people's poll are connected with the territorial division of the country.
At the same time, it is not allowed to hold a referendum on laws on taxes and the budget, on amnesty and pardon, on the authority to ratify international treaties.
Article 132 of the Italian Constitution provides for the possibility of holding a referendum on the territorial change of areas:
the merging of existing areas, the creation of new ones, and may also be allowed to provinces and communities, if they wish, to secede from one area and join another.
In addition, Part 2 of Art. 71 of the Italian Constitution also provides for such a form of direct democracy as the legislative initiative of the people: “The people shall exercise legislative initiative by introducing, on behalf of at least fifty thousand voters, a bill drawn up in the form of articles of law.”
According to the constitutional law of Italy and France, referendums are held when it is necessary to amend the Constitution. Thus, the Italian constitution establishes that laws amending the Constitution are first adopted by each of the chambers of Parliament after two consecutive discussions with an interval of at least three months, and then approved by an absolute majority of the members of each chamber in a second vote.
In Italy, such laws are put to a referendum if, within three months of their promulgation, one-fifth of the members of one of the chambers, or five hundred thousand electors, or five regional councils so request. At the same time, Art. 138 of the Italian Constitution states that a law submitted to a referendum is not considered adopted unless it is approved by a majority of valid votes.
If in each of the chambers a law amending the Constitution is passed by a majority of two-thirds of their members, then a referendum is not held.
In France, the initiative to revise the Constitution belongs to the President of the Republic, acting on the proposal of the Prime Minister, as well as to members of Parliament.
It is required that the draft or proposal for the revision of the Constitution be adopted by the two chambers in identical wording. The revision of the Constitution is final after its approval by referendum. However, the draft revision is not submitted to a referendum, Art. 89 of the French Constitution, when the President of the Republic decides to submit it to Parliament, convened as Congress. In this case, as in Italy, a qualified majority vote is required.
A draft revision of the French Constitution is only approved when it receives a three-fifths majority of the votes cast.
In addition, the French constitution establishes two cases where no constitutional review procedure can be started or continued: this is, firstly, when the integrity of the territory is infringed, and, secondly, the republican form of government cannot be subject to revision.
Italian constitution in Art. 75 provides for the possibility of holding a referendum to repeal, in whole or in part, any law or act of the Republic having the force of law, with the exception of laws on taxes and the budget, on amnesty and pardon, on the authority to ratify international treaties. A proposal made at a referendum shall be considered adopted if the majority of those entitled to do so took part in the vote and if the proposal collected a majority of the votes recognized as valid. In more detail, the procedure for holding a referendum and legislative initiative in Italy is regulated by Law no.
2. Formation and development of forms of direct democracy in the system of local self-government
democracy political local government
Local self-government as the activity of the population of the municipality in the exercise of power in a certain territory has its own forms of implementation. Like state power, municipal power can be exercised in the form of direct or representative democracy. Both those and other forms are forms of organizational activity of local self-government.
An analysis of literary and regulatory sources allows us to conclude that when classifying all the activities of local government into legal and organizational, organizational activity should be understood as a set of actions aimed at fulfilling the tasks and functions of local government, but at the same time not meaning the establishment (change, change in the scope action, cancellation) of legal norms or their application.
The organizational activity of local self-government has its own forms, enshrined in the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 "On the general principles of the organization of local self-government in the Russian Federation." According to the Law, local self-government is independent decision by the population directly and (or) through local self-government bodies on issues of local importance. In other words, the Law presupposes a combination of forms of direct and representative democracy in dealing with issues of local importance.
At the same time, the Federal Law on Local Self-Government, naming the direct forms of democracy in which local self-government can be implemented, divides them into two types: a) forms of direct implementation of local self-government by the population; b) forms of participation of the population in the implementation of local self-government.
With some similarity of these forms, there are differences between them. Thus, the implementation of forms of direct implementation of local self-government by the population leads to the adoption of an authoritative decision on local self-government issues (such a decision can be made at a referendum, at elections a decision is made to create an elected body, etc.).
The norms establishing the forms of participation of the population in resolving issues of local importance provide that, in addition to the population, other subjects (bodies, officials of local self-government) also participate in resolving issues of local importance. The implementation of the forms of this group only leads to the identification of an opinion on a specific issue of local importance, but this issue will be decided by local governments or their officials.
The difference between these forms from each other is that the forms of the first group are mandatory. So, elections with a certain frequency are necessarily held in the municipality in order to form a representative body or elect an official. A referendum on the Law in certain cases is also mandatory, as well as in the cases established by the Law, voting on the early recall of an official is mandatory.
A lesser degree of obligation is present in relation to the forms of the second group. Here, only public hearings are an obligatory step in making a decision on the established range of issues. The rest of the forms are only possible forms of participation of the population in resolving issues of local importance.
In addition to a clear division of direct forms of democracy into these groups, the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003 regulates the procedure for implementing these forms in more detail than the previous law. Let's take a closer look at the characteristics of each of them.
The local referendum and in the new Law remains the most important form of direct implementation by the population of local self-government. At the same time, the Law expands the list of entities that have the right to initiate a local referendum. Unlike the old rule enshrined in the 1995 Law, according to which the initiative could only come from the population and a representative body, now the initiative can be put forward by: citizens, electoral associations, other public associations whose charters provide for participation in elections and (or) referendums , as well as a representative body and the head of the local administration, putting forward the initiative jointly.
Analyzing the norm defining the list of entities having the right to initiate a referendum, we can conclude that the legislator indirectly grants such a right to the head of the municipality, since the latter can be the head of the local administration at the same time (clause 2, part 2, article 36) . The initiative to hold a referendum, coming from citizens and bodies of the municipality, is being implemented in different ways. An initiative to hold a referendum put forward by citizens, electoral associations, is formalized in the manner established by federal law and the law of the subject of the Federation adopted in accordance with it. The initiative of the bodies of the municipality is formalized in accordance with the Federal Law legal acts of the representative body of the municipality and the head of the local administration.
Appeared new form decisions by the population of issues of local importance - voting on the recall of a deputy, a member of an elected body of local self-government, an elected official of local self-government, voting on issues of changing the boundaries of a municipal formation, transforming a municipal formation (Article 24). Determining the general procedure for conducting such a vote, the legislator obliges municipalities to establish in their charters the grounds for recalling a deputy and other elected official of the municipality, however, it provides that only specific unlawful decisions or actions (inaction) of the named persons in if confirmed by the courts.
It seems that there is no need in the charters to define a specific list of grounds for the recall of elected officials of local self-government, since it is impossible to present all life situations in which there is a need to recall an elected person. In this regard, it is more rational to repeat the provision of the Federal Law in the charter.
The next form, enshrined in the new Law on Local Self-Government, is the gathering of citizens. In contrast to the 1995 Law on Local Self-Government, in which the assembly and assembly as forms of local self-government were fixed in one article, the 2003 Law fixed the gathering of citizens as independent form. Moreover, the Law directly established the case when exactly such a form as a gathering of citizens should be applied. In a settlement where the number of residents with the right to vote is not more than 100 people, the gathering exercises the powers of a representative body. Decisions adopted at a gathering of citizens are subject to mandatory execution on the territory of the settlement, bodies and other persons of the municipality ensure the execution of these decisions.
Other forms, enshrined in Chapter 5 of the 2003 Law, are forms of participation of the population in resolving issues of local importance. The law-making initiative of citizens is enshrined in the Law as the first of them (in the Law of 1995 - people's law-making initiative). Unlike the previous law, which enshrines only the right of citizens to a law-making initiative, the current regular act establishes general rules for the implementation of such an initiative. Thus, the Law establishes that the minimum number of the initiative group should not exceed 3 percent of the number of residents of the municipality who have the right to vote. A period has been established (3 months from the date of submission), during which the draft municipal legal act is subject to mandatory consideration by the local government. The Law states that a law-making initiative can be implemented by introducing a draft municipal legal act, and not a proposal to adopt an act on a particular issue.
In a completely new way, more broadly, the implementation of such a form as territorial public self-government is regulated in the Law.
If Art. 27 of the 1995 Law fixed only the concept of territorial public self-government (TPS) and nothing more, then in the 2003 Law, in addition to defining the concept of territorial public self-government, rules for the creation, registration of territorial public self-government, and other provisions are established. In this regard, many issues that were not resolved locally or were resolved in different ways were resolved in the Law. Thus, the Law defines the territories where territorial public self-government can be created, the procedure for establishing the boundaries of these territories, the forms of implementation of the TPS, the procedure for registering the TPS as a legal entity. However, there are a number of controversial issues in the legal regulation of territorial public self-government. In paragraph 5 of Art. 27 of the Federal Law establishes that the territorial public self-government, in accordance with its charter, may be a legal entity. According to the definition of a legal entity that has developed in the legal literature, it can be an organization created in the form prescribed by law, which has separate property, can acquire civil rights and incur obligations on its own behalf, and has the right to act as a plaintiff and defendant in court, arbitration and arbitration court.
Under territorial public self-government in accordance with Art. 27 of the Federal Law of 2003 is understood as the self-organization of citizens at their place of residence for independent implementation own initiatives on local issues. In other words, self-organization is an activity; it is not yet an organization as a social formation. Therefore, a TOS body can be a legal entity, but not the territorial public self-government itself.
The question of whether the exclusive powers of assemblies, conferences of citizens exercising territorial public self-government can be enshrined in the Law is also disputable. After all, TOS is self-organization, as the legislator defined. Self-organizing, citizens themselves determine the list of issues, the solution of which they undertake.
As a positive characteristic of the legal regulation of territorial public self-government, it is necessary to note the consolidation in the Law of the requirements for the charter of territorial public self-government.
Unfortunately, the Law does not define the forms of relations between local self-government bodies and territorial public self-government bodies, except that the latter can submit draft municipal legal acts to local self-government bodies, and the list of such possible forms is wider. For example, local governments can delegate certain powers to TPS bodies, they can make decisions in agreement with TPS bodies, etc. Why are we talking about the need to determine the main forms of such interaction at the federal level? The fact is that at the level of the municipality, the forms of interaction between local self-government bodies and TOO bodies are not always correctly defined. So, sometimes in the charters of municipalities one can find a rule according to which local governments and TPS bodies determine the scope of joint competence. But these bodies cannot have any joint competence due to their different nature. If local governments have power, then TPS bodies do not have such powers. The latter are formed in a way other than local self-government bodies and have only a public character. Because of this, TPS bodies cannot, like local self-government bodies, make power decisions. Hence, these bodies cannot have joint competence, which consists in the fact that on issues within this competence, power decisions are made by both subjects.
Completely new forms of participation of the population in resolving issues of local importance are public hearings and polls of citizens.
Public hearings are held to discuss draft municipal legal acts, and a survey of citizens is held to identify the opinion of the population and take it into account when making decisions by local governments and local government officials, as well as public authorities. If public hearings can be held on the initiative of only the subjects of the municipality, then a survey of citizens can be conducted both on the initiative
local self-government bodies, and on the initiative of state authorities of the subjects of the Federation. In the latter case, the initiative of state bodies can be implemented only on issues of changing the designated purpose of land of the municipality for objects of regional and interregional significance.
In cases specified by law, public hearings are a mandatory stage of discussion of municipal legal acts on issues of local importance (draft charter of the municipality, the local budget and a report on its implementation, plans and programs for the development of the municipality, issues of transformation of municipalities).
With regard to the survey of citizens, the Law stipulates that the legal act of the representative body of the municipality on the appointment of such a survey should establish: the date and timing of the survey, the wording of the question, the methodology for conducting the survey, the form of the questionnaire, the minimum number of residents participating in the survey. Since such a form as a survey can be carried out on the territory of a small rural settlement, the question arises: is it possible for such a settlement to develop on a good professional level survey methodology? It seems that in this case, the state authorities of the relevant subject can provide methodological assistance.
In more detail, the Law spells out the provision of such a form as a meeting of citizens, which, according to Art. 29 may be held to discuss issues of local importance, inform the population about the activities of bodies and officials local self-government, the implementation of territorial public self-government. Meetings of citizens, in contrast to the gathering of citizens, are held only on a part of the territory of the municipality. In other words, the assembly can be a form of implementation of both local self-government and territorial public self-government. The meeting of citizens may accept appeals to bodies and officials of local self-government, elect persons authorized to represent the meeting of citizens in relations with bodies and other persons of local self-government. The results of the meeting are subject to official publication. In cases stipulated by the charter of the municipal formation and (or) regulatory legal acts of the representative body of the municipal formation, the charter of territorial public self-government, the powers of the assembly may be exercised by the conference (Article 30).
The Law also preserved such a form as appeals of citizens to local self-government bodies. The law also speaks of the possibility of using other forms of direct implementation by the population of local self-government and participation in its implementation, which do not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
At the same time, the Law establishes two basic principles for the implementation of these forms - legality and voluntariness. State bodies and their officials, bodies and officials of local self-government are obliged to assist the population in the direct implementation of local self-government and participation in the implementation of local self-government.
The procedure for the implementation of many of these forms should be determined in accordance with the Law in the charter of the municipality and (or) the normative act of the representative body of local self-government. The task of local self-government bodies is to create a sufficient legal basis for the population to exercise the right to participate in resolving issues of local importance. The mechanism for the implementation of these forms must be effective so that a situation does not arise when the order is formally fixed, but it is impossible to implement it in practice.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the following conclusions can be drawn.
Direct democracy, being a universal value, has the greatest potential for implementation in the system of local self-government. Local communities are a social space for the implementation of direct democracy, which allows individuals living on the territory of the respective municipalities the opportunity to participate in solving local affairs. Only after the population becomes the subject of local self-government in municipalities, i.e. a group of persons formally united by the territory of residence, and a local community based on common interests, informal ties, direct democracy will become not a formal, but a real institution of constitutional and municipal law. It is the local community that is called upon to become the "starting station" of the long process of democratization of the Russian state and society.
One of the many difficulties in the development of direct democracy at the local level is due to the fact that local self-government in Russia did not grow from below, but was introduced from above. The reasons for this are:
Negative qualities political culture citizens, which may include the passivity and indifference of the ruled and the permissiveness of the managers, the weak ability to self-organize, which are the consequences of the totalitarian political regime that existed in the country, the lack of democratic traditions and skills. And this became a fact that led to the fact that instead of government through citizens, we have government for citizens. This level of political culture is by no means conducive to the implementation of the institutions of direct democracy in the system of local self-government.
The consequence of the above is a weak structure, underdevelopment of local communities, lack of corporate consciousness. In such a society, the elements of self-organization are weak. As a result, in many subjects of the Russian Federation there is a strengthening of authoritarian regimes that are able to concentrate power in their hands, but cannot effectively solve the existing problems of the region and the local community.
As a result, local self-government becomes a kind of pseudo-democratic decoration, "embedded" in the regional political space in such a way as to exclude any attempts to become a full-fledged subject of the political and economic life of the regions. With the exception of local elections, citizens' appeals, public manifestations, the institutions of direct democracy on present stage of the Russian society have not become an integral part of the existence of local communities and an effective tool for resolving issues of local importance. Many institutions of direct democracy (local referendum, meetings of citizens at the place of residence in cities) are not widespread enough, and some (discussions of draft decisions of local governments) are simply forgotten.
Despite the above, the fate of direct democracy in the system of local self-government does not seem absolutely hopeless. She seems to have potential. First of all, the above model of Russian political culture is gradually, albeit slowly, being replaced by liberal-democratic models of political culture. The favorable development of this trend, which ensures a high level of public consciousness, political and legal culture, determined primarily by respect for the person, contributes to the formation of local communities, which, through the institutions of direct democracy, will be included in the process of managing local affairs.
An important condition for enhancing the role of institutions of direct democracy in the system of local self-government is the preparation of citizens to create a favorable socio-psychological environment for participating in self-government through direct expression of will as a vital form of self-organization of society. To this end, it is advisable to carry out activities to clarify the essence of the system of institutions of direct democracy in the system of local self-government. And although a certain part of the population has some experience of participating in them, the majority of Russian citizens, especially young people, have little idea of what the institutions of direct democracy are, what their purpose is, what public functions it performs. Local governments, members of the public through funds mass media, oral campaigning should explain the essence of direct democracy at the local level, show on concrete examples their vitality and effectiveness. Demonstrating the effectiveness of direct democracy can arouse interest among various sections of the public in the use of its institutions in self-government, the desire to interact with self-government bodies to solve specific social and economic problems. The ultimate goal of explanatory and propaganda work should be the willingness of citizens to participate in resolving issues of local importance through the institutions of direct democracy.
An important form of adoption of such decisions by local communities is intended to be their influence on the improvement of legislation on direct democracy in the system of local self-government, both through representatives in the legislative bodies of Russia and its subjects, and through referendums, popular law-making initiatives.
Literature
1.Antonova N.A. Development of forms of direct democracy in the system of local self-government // Constitutional and municipal law. - M.: Lawyer, 2007, No. 4. - S. 37-40.
2.Civil law of Russia. General part: Course of lectures / Ed. HE. Sadikov. M.: Jurist, 2001. - 538 p.
.Demichel A., Demichel F., Piquemal M. Institutions and power in France. Institutional forms of state-monopoly capitalism. M. Progress. 1977 - 232 p.
.Konrad Hesse. Fundamentals of the constitutional law of Germany. Legal Literature, 1981. - 367 p.
.Constitutional Law: Textbook. Rep. ed. A.E. Kozlov - M.: BEK Publishing House, 2005. - 464 p.
.Political science. Lecture course. Ed. Marchenko M.N. 4th ed., revised. and additional - M.: Jurist, 2003. - 683 p.
Tutoring
Need help learning a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
Forms of direct expression of the will of citizens can be of two types:
1) compulsory nature - these are forms that allow you to identify the mandatory will of the population of the municipality: local referendum, municipal elections, meetings (gatherings);
2) advisory nature - these are forms that contribute to the identification of the public opinion of the population regarding the implementation of local self-government and allow the bodies and officials of local self-government to make (or not to make) a decision taking into account the opinion and interests of the majority of the population. Such forms are territorial public self-government, people's law-making initiative, citizens' appeals to local governments, residents' conferences on local issues, public opinion polls, rallies, demonstrations, processions, picketing, etc.
The highest direct expression of the will of the population is a local referendum.
local referendum is the vote of citizens on the most important issues of local self-government. The Constitution, fixing the referendum as one of the forms of local self-government (Article 130), recognizes the right of every citizen of the Russian Federation to participate in the referendum (Article 32).
Federal Law No. 131-FZ of October 6, 2003 “On the General Principles of Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation” (hereinafter referred to in this chapter as the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003) establishes the following principles for holding a local referendum: 1) participation in a referendum is universal and equal; 2) voting is carried out directly and voluntarily; 3) control over the will of citizens is not allowed.
municipal elections, as well as a local referendum, are the highest direct expression of the will of the population of the municipality. Their significance is determined, first of all, by the fact that representative bodies of local government are formed through elections and receive their powers as heads of local administrations. During the election campaign, citizens, with their proposals, direct the activities of local self-government bodies, critically evaluate their work. Each election campaign stimulates the development of social activity of citizens, helps to identify their urgent needs and interests, creates the necessary prerequisites for their satisfaction.
According to the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003, municipal elections are carried out on the basis of the general principles of Russian electoral law: universal equal direct suffrage by secret ballot.
Gatherings of citizens is a traditional form of local affairs management in Russia. Gatherings provide citizens with the opportunity to combine collective discussion of issues and decision-making with personal activity and initiative, expressed in their questions, speeches, participation in voting, etc. Gatherings also serve as a form of attracting citizens to the implementation of a wide variety of managerial functions. According to the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003, in small urban and rural settlements - with the number of voters less than 100 people - gatherings take on the role and functions of a representative body, which in such cases is not formed. The procedure for convening and holding gatherings is determined at the level of subjects of the Russian Federation and local governments. Decisions made at the meeting of citizens are binding.
Territorial public self-government, according to the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003 (Article 27), is a form of self-organization of citizens at their place of residence on a part of the territory of the municipality. It should be noted that territorial public self-government is a voluntary form of self-organization of citizens, i.e., it may not be in demand by residents.
People's Lawmaking Initiative a fairly relevant form of direct expression of the will of citizens, which makes it possible to identify the public opinion of the population regarding the implementation of local self-government. Citizens with their proposals and projects on issues of local importance can help representative bodies in the development of local regulations.
Appeals citizens to local governments as one of the forms of direct expression of the will of the population of the municipality gives them the opportunity to participate in determining the tasks and activities of local governments, in developing draft decisions for them, in monitoring the activities of local governments and officials. Citizens' appeals are an important means of showing social and political activity, the interest of residents in public affairs. Citizens have the right to apply to local self-government bodies both personally and to send individual and collective appeals to them. Guarantees for the exercise by the population of the municipality of their right to apply to local governments are enshrined in the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003. It is the duty of local governments to consider citizens' appeals within a month and administrative responsibility, which can be established for violation of the timing and procedure for responding to citizens' appeals.
Opinion polls one of the forms of direct expression of the will of the population, which makes it possible to identify public opinion regarding the implementation of local self-government. The results of public opinion polls are subjected to analysis, sociological research, and then communicated to the population through local media. Bodies and officials of local self-government are interested in constant monitoring and publication of their results.
One of the new forms of direct democracy is public hearing, which are held by the head of the municipality with the participation of residents to discuss the most important drafts of local regulations. Thus, according to the Law on Local Self-Government of 2003, the following should be submitted for public hearings: 1) the draft charter of the municipality, as well as drafts on amendments and additions to the charter; 2) draft local budget and report on its implementation; 3) draft plans and programs for the development of the municipality; 4) questions about the transformation of the municipality; 5) issues of urban planning.
Rallies, demonstrations, processions, picketing and other mass demonstrations are one of the important forms of direct democracy, although they have a contradictory effect on the socio-economic life of citizens. These actions, to a certain extent, express the mood of the inhabitants, therefore, ignoring such forms of expression of the will of citizens can lead to a change of power, to the disruption of the adoption and implementation of effective development programs and to the destabilization of the life of the entire municipality.
The entry of local self-government into the system of democracy reflects the most important priorities of the constitutional and legal policy of the Russian Federation, aimed at developing the institutions of civil society and a democratic constitutional state. Recognition of local self-government as “one of the fundamental foundations Russian system democracy” is determined by the fact that it acts as a way of life of the local community associated with the formation of a certain political consciousness and the satisfaction of specific public law interests of the population of the municipality.
The debate about the essence of democracy has been going on for centuries. According to some authors, there is no generally accepted definition, a clear concept of democracy. Others argue that for the beginning of the 21st century, this concept is generally outdated and requires revision, taking into account the real behavior of individuals and achievements in economic and technological development.
An important issue is the relationship between democracy and local self-government. Historically, there have been three distinct views on the relationship between local self-government and democracy. The first considered self-government as a carefully guarded tradition that was in conflict with democratic principles. According to the second, the principles of democracy - majority rule, egalitarianism and common standards for all - cannot be adapted to the needs of local self-government. Thus, the concept of democracy does not include local self-government; moreover, these concepts contradict each other. The third point of view insists on the necessary connection between democracy and local self-government.
Supporting the latter position, we present a number of common features that are characteristic of both democracy and local self-government, which are forms of exercising public power. D.Yu. Shapsugov notes that self-government is one of two constituent parts through which democracy is exercised. Most forms of local self-government function on the basis of principles common to democracy, such as freedom and equality. The development of both democracy and local self-government is determined by the breadth of application of the principles of electivity, the activity of the system of representative bodies and the functioning of institutions of direct democracy.
Various aspects of the interpretation of the phenomenon of democracy testify to the multitude of its manifestations and qualities. Hence the existence of various definitions of this concept. Some authors saw democracy as a state phenomenon, others spoke of its two systems - state and public; still others recognized the possibility of only political democracy; fourth - non-political. There are characteristics of democracy as a political relationship, or a socio-political relationship, or a socio-political movement, a way of organizing and functioning of politics. Some authors use the terms democracy and democracy as synonyms, while others distinguish between these concepts.
We believe that the concept of democracy, being multidimensional, can be characterized from different angles. The main thing here is that it is necessary to determine the permanent and most significant generic features of democracy that characterize its relationship with the state, state power, political system society, local government. Within the framework of this article, touching in one way or another on the various institutions of democracy, we will focus primarily on its characterization as a general principle of the constitutional system and the most important right of citizens to exercise local self-government. The main methodological position in this case will be such a concept as the inseparability of democracy from genuine democracy, which is the dominant that determines the content of democracy and determines all forms of its manifestation.
If we turn to the concept of "democracy", then each of its two definitions - "people" and "power" - is a complex phenomenon. From a legal point of view, the concept of "people" is identified with the concept of "citizens" and is defined as belonging to an associated within the framework of united state collections of people. Power is a social phenomenon. It appears along with the emergence of society and exists in any society, since any society requires management, provided different means including coercion.
It is known that state power is not the only form of power of the people. The most important form of its implementation is also the direct expression of the will of citizens, carried out at different levels. One of these levels is local self-government.
Taking into account the centuries-old experience of state building in Russia, the Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted in the course of a referendum on December 12, 1993, fixes in Art. 3 the provision that the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the Russian Federation is its multinational people. This means that Russia is proclaimed a state of democracy, that is, a democratic state. As rightly noted by V.T. Kabyshev: "The sovereignty of the multinational people of Russia is not the arithmetic sum of the will of the population of each of its subjects, but an essential characteristic, meaning that the will of the people is universal, constant, it covers all spheres of society without exception."
Recognition of the people as the supreme bearer of all power is an expression of popular sovereignty, which should mean that the people, not sharing their power with anyone, exercise it independently and independently of any other social forces or corporations, uses it solely for their own interests.
Even in the middle of the XVIII century. famous Russian democrat A.N. Radishchev put the principles of popular sovereignty in the first place. He wrote that “the people’s conciliar power is the original, and therefore the highest, unified, the composition of society, able to found or destroy, that the people entrust the exercise of power to one person or many, and that the user of the people’s power issues laws, but no law can determine either the path or limit to the conciliar action of the people.
The will of the people is the only basis of a democratic state; it gives rise to a mandate for the organization of state power and any changes in its form. Under democracy, the exercise of power is constituted, legitimized and controlled by the people, that is, by the citizens of the state, since power acts in the forms of self-determination and self-government of the people, in which all citizens can participate on an equal footing. In other words, the people of the Russian Federation exercise their power both directly and through state authorities and local self-government bodies.
Thus, depending on the form of expression of the will of the people, one can single out representative and direct democracy, which is also represented at the level of local self-government. Moreover, it is impossible to talk about the priority of this or that form of democracy, since they are equally important for the implementation of democracy. But, in our opinion, the implementation of these forms of democracy is particularly effective at the local level, since it has great potential to reflect the interests of the local community.
Covering almost all aspects of the democratic organization of the life of the population, local self-government makes it possible to rationally decentralize and deconcentrate many functions of state power, transfer decision-making on all issues of local life to the municipality, thereby stimulating the activity of citizens and ensuring their real involvement in such decisions. It is no coincidence that A.I. Solzhenitsyn wrote: “Without properly established local self-government, there can be no respectable life, and the very concept of “civil freedom” loses its meaning.”
The institution of representation in the system of local self-government is the exercise by the population of the municipality of its power through elected authorized representatives who make decisions expressing its will, that is, all residents living in a certain territory. Elected representation is the most important means of ensuring genuine democracy, because it is formed by local self-government bodies elected by the population.
Soviet legal science was based on the postulate of the priority of representative democracy. With the broad development of direct democracy, representative democracy retained its significance as the leading form of socialist democracy. Despite the fact that the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1978 provided for the possibility of self-government in such direct forms as meetings (gatherings) of citizens and referendums, this basic norm was more formal.
The modern concept of democracy, on the contrary, proceeds from a reasonable combination of both forms of democracy. Through direct democracy, the representative form receives legal authority from the people to exercise state power, that is, it is constituted.
In the science of constitutional law, there are different approaches to the definition of "direct democracy".
So, N.P. Farberov understood direct democracy as "the direct expression of the will of the masses in the development and adoption of state decisions, as well as their direct participation in the implementation of these decisions, in the exercise of people's control."
G.H. Shakhnazarov considers direct democracy as an order in which decisions are made on the basis of the direct and concrete expression of the will of all citizens.
V.T. Kabyshev believes that direct democracy is the direct participation of citizens in the exercise of power in the development, adoption and implementation of government decisions.
All these authors, of course, are united by the fact that they talk about the participation of the people exclusively in the management of state affairs, while ignoring the life of the local community. This was due primarily to the lack of real self-government principles in the Soviet construction of that period.
In our opinion, Yu.A. Dmitriev, considering it as social relations arising in the process of solving certain issues of state and public life. He singled out three main groups of forms of direct expression of the will of citizens. First, a referendum, elections, general meetings population, characterizing the imperative function of direct democracy. Secondly, rallies, marches, demonstrations, picketing as a tool for comparing the will of the people and the government they are forming, performing a regulatory function. Thirdly, people's initiative, the activities of political parties, the recall of an elected people's representative, combining both of these functions of the people's will.
The advantages of direct democracy lie mainly in the fact that it ensures the fullest participation of the people in government. social life, minimizes the alienation of the people from the institutions of power, strengthens the legitimacy of the latter. However, direct democracy also has significant drawbacks: low efficiency and insufficient competence of its decisions, which is explained by the lack of sufficient knowledge among the population about the subject of decisions; reduction of personal responsibility for the consequences of public decisions taken; complex organizational and technical support and large financial expenses; greater exposure to unexpected, unpredictable factors.
But, despite these shortcomings, at present, when considering the importance of direct democracy as a form of democracy, one should proceed from the fact that, firstly, the priority of the individual in society and the state is fixed in the constitutional norms, since it is the individual and the citizen that represents the highest social value. (Article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). This does not exclude the value of the state itself, but the priority hierarchy reflects the strategic links of the constitutional concept of state building. Secondly, the development of democracy requires the constant development of the initiative and independence of citizens, the strengthening of their decisive will in all processes of economic and political development. Thirdly, representative bodies should not be opposed to the direct participation of the population in the development and adoption of decisions. Both representative and direct democracy represent the unity of the respective public law institutions and are in close interaction. Fourth, direct democracy covers all spheres and levels community development- from the activities of state bodies to local self-government.
In our opinion, only direct democracy ensures the most complete participation of the population in government, creates conditions for the development of civil society institutions.
At the local level, institutions of direct democracy are forms of direct expression of the will of the entire population of a municipality or any of its groups, based on the inevitable interaction of the inhabitants of this territory. Thus, it can be argued that the very nature of self-government is more in line with forms of direct democracy (referendum, elections, gatherings, appeals, etc.), which involve the direct participation of citizens in the decision-making process, and often final ones, which, of course, does not detract from the role and importance of specially authorized bodies, which the population of the municipality entrusts with the right to resolve issues of local importance.
Therefore, local self-government, elevated to a constitutional level, contributes to the strengthening of democratic principles. In Art. 130 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes that local self-government in the Russian Federation ensures the independent solution of local issues by the population. This right can be considered in two ways - as an individual right to independently resolve issues of local importance, and the collective right of the population of the municipality derived from it to choose the optimal model for organizing local government in the territory of residence: “the population itself (the principle of independence) determines the feasible range of tasks to be solved by it (principle of self-sufficiency) and makes the necessary efforts to solve them (principle of self-reliance).
Analyzing the institutions of direct democracy at the local level, it can be noted that the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131-FZ “On the General Principles of Organizing Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation” made significant additions to the main forms of direct democracy compared to the similar federal law of 1995 d. The provisions of these federal laws can be visualized in the following table:
democracy self-government power representation
Institutions of direct democracy play a special role in the system of local self-government, allowing the population of a certain territory to directly participate in solving local issues. Institutions of direct democracy are forms of local self-government.
The forms of local self-government should be understood as organization of the system of local self-government, i.e. channels, structures, bodies through which local power is exercised, issues of local importance are resolved. These include forms of direct and representative democracy, through which democracy is exercised.
Between all forms there is a close organizational and legal relationship, interaction and interdependence. All of them, in various ways and methods, solve essentially the common goals and tasks of local life. Therefore, in their totality, these forms constitute a single system of local self-government in the municipality. However, such unity, as O. E. Kutafin rightly emphasizes, exists only within the framework of a particular municipality and, unlike state power, does not constitute a single system of local self-government within the Russian Federation. Each system of local self-government, having a common legal base, functions independently and independently of others, the subordination of one municipality to another is not allowed.
The forms of organization and implementation of local self-government are one of the central issues of a larger problem, namely, municipal construction. The question of the forms of implementation of local self-government is regulated by international legal documents and Russian legislation.
The European Charter of Local Self-Government states that the right to local self-government is exercised by councils or assemblies consisting of members elected by free, secret, equal, direct and universal suffrage. Councils or assemblies may have executive bodies accountable to them. This provision does not exclude recourse to citizens' meetings, referenda or any other form of direct participation of citizens, if this is permitted by law.
The Declaration on the Principles of Local Self-Government in the Commonwealth Member States establishes the right of territorial communities to resolve all issues of local importance through local self-government bodies elected by them or directly. These rights are guaranteed by constitutions and current legislation.
The Constitution of the Russian Federation, fixing in Art. 3 forms of democracy in our country, indicates that the people exercise their power directly, as well as through state authorities and local governments.
Revealing the forms of local self-government, Art. 130 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes that it is carried out by citizens through a referendum, elections, other forms directly from the will, through elected and other local governments.
The forms of implementation of local self-government are fixed in the Federal Law "On the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation", other federal laws, constitutions, charters, laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, charters of municipalities.
The direct forms of local self-government include forms of direct expression of the will of citizens of the implementation of local self-government, enshrined in Ch. IV Federal Law "On the General Principles of Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation", namely:
v local referendum;
v municipal elections;
v meetings (gatherings) of citizens;
v people's law-making initiative;
v citizens' appeals to local self-government bodies;
v territorial public self-government;
v other forms of participation of the population in the implementation of local self-government.
Question 2. Local referendum.
A local referendum may be held throughout the territory of the municipality. The decision to call a local referendum is made by the representative body of the municipality:
1) on an initiative put forward by citizens of the Russian Federation who have the right to participate in a local referendum;
2) on an initiative put forward by electoral associations, other public associations whose charters provide for participation in elections and (or) referendums and which are registered in the manner and within the time limits established by federal law;
3) on the initiative of the representative body of the municipality and the head of the local administration, jointly nominated by them.
The condition for calling a local referendum at the initiative of citizens, electoral associations, other public associations,
is the collection of signatures in support of this initiative, the number of which is established by the law of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation and cannot exceed 5% of the number of referendum participants registered in the territory of the municipality in accordance with federal law.
An initiative to hold a referendum put forward by citizens, electoral associations, other public associations shall be drawn up in accordance with the procedure established by federal law and the law of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation adopted in accordance with it.
The initiative to hold a referendum, put forward jointly by the representative body of the municipality and the head of the local administration, is formalized by legal acts of the representative body of the municipality and the head of the local administration.
The representative body of the municipal formation is obliged to call a local referendum within 30 days from the date of receipt by the representative body of the municipal formation of the documents on the basis of which the local referendum is called.
From the point of view of observance of the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation and, we repeat, the technological effectiveness, the procedure for initiating a local referendum raises doubts. Just like the procedure for putting forward an initiative for a local referendum in general, it does not agree in terms with the procedure established in Art. 36 of the Law on Guarantees (70 days versus 30). Moreover, an essential condition for calling a referendum is precisely the creation of an initiative group (“group of voters”), and for this, according to the Law on Guarantees, which in this case will apply, may take up to 50 days. Most of the said period is devoted to the procedure with the participation of election commissions or authorities, which means that the fate of the referendum will depend on them. Not to mention the fact that the initiative group may be denied the appointment of a referendum on the formal grounds provided for in Art. 36 of the Law on guarantees. What to do in this case, the Law on Local Self-Government is silent.
If a local referendum is not appointed by the representative body of the municipality in deadlines, a referendum is appointed by a court on the basis of an appeal from citizens, electoral associations, the head of a municipality, state authorities of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, an election commission of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, or a prosecutor. The local referendum appointed by the court is organized by the election commission of the municipality, and its holding is ensured executive body state power of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation or another body entrusted by the court with ensuring the holding of a local referendum.
Citizens of the Russian Federation whose place of residence is located within the boundaries of a municipality have the right to participate in a local referendum. Citizens of the Russian Federation participate in a local referendum on the basis of universal, equal and direct expression of will by secret ballot.
The decision adopted at a local referendum is subject to mandatory execution on the territory of the municipality and does not need to be approved by any state authorities, their officials or local self-government bodies.
Local self-government bodies ensure the implementation of the decision adopted at a local referendum in accordance with the delimitation of powers between them, determined by the charter of the municipality.
A decision to hold a local referendum, as well as a decision adopted at a local referendum, may be appealed in court by citizens, local self-government bodies, a prosecutor, and state authorities authorized by federal law.
Thus, it should be said that a local referendum is a direct form of expression of the will of the population. However, due to its organizational complexity, which causes a number of difficulties, it is rarely used in the Russian Federation.
Democracy is the most complex and multi-valued form of government. The term "democracy" originated in antiquity and became the most common in political science. It was first used in a translation of Aristotle's Politics in 1260. Disputes about the meaning of the concept of "democracy" have not ceased from then to the present.
In political science, generally accepted ideas have not yet been developed that would make it possible to formulate a clear definition of democracy. Various authors highlight individual components of democracy, such as majority rule or separation of powers. Therefore, democracy is interpreted in several senses:
- 1) broadly, as a social system based on the voluntariness of all forms of an individual's life;
- 2) more narrowly, as a form of state in which all citizens have equal rights to power;
- 3) an ideal model of a social structure, as a certain worldview, which is based on the values of freedom, equality, human rights.
Simultaneously with the development of human society, the evolution of the concept of "democracy" took place. The main stages in understanding democracy:
- 1) The writings of Aristotle speak of the ancient tradition in the understanding of democracy - ethical. It originates from the 5th century BC. Democracy was seen as a state system - the direct rule of citizens in small policies. It was based on human virtue and was of a qualifying nature, and decisions were made by the majority of equal and free citizens;
- 2) The classical concept of democracy is legal. Its author is A. Tocqueville. It developed during the period of the formation of nation-states, surpassing small policies in territory. New stage development of the concept of democracy began with the Great French Revolution 1789. Democracy began to be seen as a direction of social thought, shaping the goals of a socio-political movement that rejects monarchy and elitism. Democracy has acquired the character of representative government, which is elected by wealthy citizens.
Due to the fact that the original meaning of democracy as democracy was significantly at odds with the variety of practical forms of its implementation in modern societies, there was confusion in the understanding of this term.
There are six different theories of democracy:
- 1) Liberal theory, which we can learn about in the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville "Democracy in America". Democracy is seen as responsible and competent government. The source of power is the people, which expresses its will through its representatives, who have received their powers for a certain period. Relations between the people and their representatives are enshrined in the constitution;
- 2) The theory of direct democracy, one of the authors of which is J. - J. Rousseau. It denies the principle of representativeness. Democracy is the direct rule of a people capable of expressing their united will. It is the basis of the activity of governments and the drafting of laws;
- 3) The theory of pluralistic democracy. Its supporters, one of whom was G. Lasky, deny the existence of a single will of the people as the basis for the activities of power. This theory proceeds from the balance of political forces, which excludes the actions of one ruling group in their own interests;
- 4) Elite theory of democracy. One of its supporters is J. Schumpeter. Since there is no rational behavior of an individual in voting or decision-making, and there is no binding concept of the common good, a political division of labor is necessary. The requirements of democracy concern only the methods of formation of institutions of power;
- 5) According to Carol Pateman, there is no principle of division of political labor in the parsitorial theory of democracy. Self-determination of the individual is seen as the right to full political participation on the scale of the whole society and in its various spheres;
- 6) Lenin Vladimir Ilyich was an adherent of the theory of socialist democracy. In his opinion, democracy is a form of class domination. Within this theory, two traditions developed. In the orthodox concept, the rights and freedoms of the individual are sacrificed to the interests of society. And the reformist theory understands democracy as a certain form of compromise, an agreement of heterogeneous forces, confirming that the goals of society change as the conditions of society change.
Political practice reveals a number of common features of modern democracies:
- 1) Common legality;
- 2) Competing policy;
- 3) Presence of political parties;
- 4) Civil, political and social rights.
Being vulnerable in changing conditions, democracy as a complex form of relations between the authorities and citizens seems to be quite effective in highly organized, pluralistic and stable societies.
Thus, democracy is the most complex shape government, about the origin and main idea of which there are many different theories.
The second concept under consideration is "local self-government". In order to understand what it is, it is necessary to define the concepts of "management" and "self-management".
According to Babun R.V., management is external influence entering the system from the outside, and self-government is an internal influence that is produced by the system itself.
In the Russian Federation, as a democratic state, local self-government is recognized and guaranteed. It is independent within its powers, and local self-government bodies are not included in the system of state power.
Proceeding from this, local self-government is the level of public authority that is closest to the population, is elected by the population and has significant autonomy and independence in resolving issues of local life.
Professor L.A. Melikhov, the founder of Russian municipal science, pointed out the main features of local self-government that distinguish it from state power. These features, in his opinion, include:
difference in the nature of power. Local self-government is a subordinate power, acting in the manner and within the limits indicated to it by the supreme power;
delineation of areas of competence. The range of cases that are provided to local self-government is limited;
independent sources of funds. Local self-government is provided with certain definite and limited means for the implementation of its tasks, which makes it possible to speak of local self-government as a special subject of rights;
territorially limited electoral principle.
There are three theories of local self-government: public theory, state theory and state-public theory.
Social theory, previously called "the theory of the free community", is based on a clear distinction between state and communal affairs. One of the supporters of this theory was Lazarevsky N.I. He believed that the community was inviolable for the state. The founders of the theory believed that it was necessary to add a fourth, communal power, to the three branches of constitutional power. The state does not have the right to interfere in the internal affairs of the community, it only has to ensure that the community observes the laws of the state and does not go beyond its powers.
Depending on which aspect of the independence of the local community from the state comes to the fore, there are three varieties of the social theory of self-government.
economic theory: the functions of self-government are strictly economic. This is how the economic independence of the community (commune) and the lack of state supervision over its activities are justified;
legal theory: local governments are organs of the community, not the state, therefore, in contrast to the bodies appointed by the government, elected local governments are needed;
political theory: self-government consists in the independence of citizens who have not entered the public service and therefore are free in their will.
All these varieties converge in one thing - the delimitation of communal and state affairs.
The state theory considers local self-government as part of the state structure and proceeds from the impossibility of distinguishing between state and communal affairs. According to Lazarevsky I.I., local governments should be included in the system government controlled.
According to this theory, communal affairs are part of state affairs that are transferred to the local authorities for execution; the state is the source of communal power; any public administration is a matter of state, therefore the community is not separated from the state, but serves its purposes and interests. Local authorities were based on such a theory in the Soviet period.
But most modern scientists adhere to the dualistic, state-society theory of local self-government. It assumes that the local community performs not only local affairs that do not require intervention and control by the state, but also a certain range of affairs. state importance. The ratio between the affairs of local and state levels in local self-government in different countries in different periods of time may vary.
In addition to the difference between local self-government and local government, one should highlight the difference between local self-government and self-government in public organizations. A member of a public organization who does not wish to comply with its statutory provisions and requirements may withdraw from it or be expelled. A resident of a settlement cannot be excluded, so he must be forced to comply general rules and procedures established by the local government. For the possibility of such coercion, local governments must have powers that are received from the population that elected them and are enshrined by the state in its legislation.
According to the law "On the general principles of the organization of local self-government in the Russian Federation":
- 1) Local self-government constitutes one of the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation, is recognized, guaranteed and implemented throughout the entire territory of the Russian Federation.
- 2) Local self-government in the Russian Federation is a form of exercise by the people of their power, ensuring, within the limits established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws, and in cases established by federal laws, laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, independent and under their own responsibility decision by the population directly and (or) through local governments of issues of local importance based on the interests of the population, taking into account historical and other local traditions.
In our opinion, the most complete list of the basic principles of the organization of local self-government is given by Kutafin O.E. and Fadeev V.I. :
independence of the population in solving issues of local importance;
organizational separation of local self-government bodies in the state administration system and interaction with state authorities in the implementation of common tasks and functions;
compliance with the powers of the financial and material resources of local self-government;
responsibility to the population of bodies and officials of local self-government;
variety of organizational forms of implementation of local self-government;
observance of human and civil rights and freedoms;
legality in the organization and activities of local self-government;
publicity of the activities of local self-government;
a combination of collegiality and unity of command in the activities of local self-government;
state guarantee in the activities of local self-government.
So, we believe that local self-government is the basis of democracy. In each country, public policy determines the main directions of legislation and law enforcement practice. If the opinion of citizens is not taken into account when making decisions at the state level, then such a local democracy cannot be called capable. The effectiveness of state policy directly depends on how successfully local specifics are taken into account in decision-making and to what extent citizens have the opportunity to influence state and local affairs.