Local self‐government in Russia: Awakening from slumber?

Abstract

AFTER DECADES OF CENTRAL STATE CONTROL, the devolution of political power could be considered as a precondition for proper democratisation of Russian society. Decentralisation and territorial self-organisation were not only supposed to revive ethnocultural traditions as a counterweight of tackling national conflicts by military means, but also to enhance the efficiency and responsiveness of political authorities to local demand,1 which could have its own impact on market reform. By incorporating the right to local self-government into the new Russian Constitution, this institution was defined as a cornerstone in the evolving process of Russian state-building and federalism. However, whether the 'sleeping beauty' of Russian local communities can be awakened by new legislation remains yet to be seen. Interpretations in the Western and Russian academic debate on local self-government ranged from one of continuity and 'path dependence' due to the dominance of traditional Russian and Soviet executive power to one of local elites' attempt at resisting central state intervention and controlling territorial resources.2 But, as earlier Russian writers had already stressed, the tendency to excessive bureaucratisation in running state affairs, leading to a growing state machinery, goes hand in hand in Russia with elements of anarchy, ignorance, subservience and a lack of democratic participation.3 According to one Western analyst, imperial traditions of local government complicate the attempt to establish effective local democracy in Russia, including the tradition whereby local governments are outposts of the central state while, at the same time, trying to reproduce its brand of centralised, autocratic rule within their own domain, the tradition of an unaccountable command structure and corruption as a recognised part of administrative life.4 This makes it clear that proper local self-government in Russia could hardly be imposed 'from above' nor could it be part of the existing state administration. At stake are not only issues of finding new forms of accountability and representation of local interests, but also to what extent the Russian state would be prepared to grant budgetary autonomy and to surrender previous state property and land to the municipalities. These issues are of major concern in this article and will be discussed in sequence. The first section looks at the theoretical and parliamentary debate in the process of elaborating a new law on local self-government in 1994-95, which had unprecedented participatory features, incorporating ideas and amendments from deputies of various political groupings, analysts, journalists, local governments and ordinary people. The second section scrutinises institutional arrangements and prob-