27.03.09

On Friday (21 March) the State Duma gave first-reading approval to a presidential draft law making it possible to dismiss municipal leaders, including mayors elected by the citizens.

In his autumn message Dmitriy Medvedev intimated that deputies should be given the opportunity to "control municipal leaders more effectively." And now this "more effective" control has been realized in a draft law under which the head of a municipality can be "removed" by decision of the municipal council. The grounds for removing him may be "actions or inaction" that have resulted in overdue debts in excess of 30% of the municipal budget's revenues, the misspending of funds transferred to the municipality from the regional budget for the exercise of "individual state responsibilities," or a violation of the Constitution or legislation when exercising his powers (the latter has to be established by a court decision). A mayor can also be "removed" if he fails for more than three months to meet his obligations in terms of "resolving issues of local significance."

A dismissal can be initiated by deputies (at least one third of the total number) or the regional governor. The decision has to be adopted by the votes of at least two thirds of deputies, and for the removal of a mayor it is obligatory to obtain the agreement of the governor (with the exception of a situation where a mayor has been neglecting his duties for more than three months: In this case it is sufficient to "take account of the opinion" of the leader of the region when the decision is being made).

It is not hard to see that the system that has been described makes mayors dependent on deputies and gives governors a significant lever for bringing pressure to bear on "recalcitrant" mayors. Generally speaking, governors already have levers even now, but it is hard to make use of them. A governor has the right to himself remove a mayor from office if he has a) issued a decision that is illegal or violates citizens' rights; b) has created "a threat to the unity and territorial integrity of Russia, the national security and defense capability of Russia, or the unity of the legal and economic area of Russia"; or c) has allowed the misspending of subventions from a superior budget. But all these violations have to be established by a court, and a mayor can be removed only if he refuses for a period of two months to comply with the court ruling and eliminate the violation. I cannot recall such precedents in all the years that this rule has been in existence.

Meanwhile, the "removal" currently being proposed for the same misuse of funds does not require a court ruling and can be carried out pretty quickly. Because there is no difficulty finding violations if monitoring and auditing agencies so wish. Furthermore, a mayor does not have the right to dissolve the corps of deputies.

If a governor has influence over municipal council deputies, he will be able to get rid of a "recalcitrant" mayor without special difficulty and thereby resolve a task that has been a headache for more than one generation of Russian governors. Particularly if it is a question of the leaders of oblast centers who, as a rule, are political rivals to governors and fight them for resources. But it is impossible not to note that the scheme for involving the governor in the mechanism for removing a mayor is dubious from the viewpoint of both the Russian Constitution and the European Charter of Local Self-Government (local self-government, as is known, is separate from state power). And if anybody was to risk disputing this mechanism in the Constitutional Court, the examination would promise to be interesting.

The facilitating of the "impeachment" of mayors is handy not only for governors but also for the party to which the overwhelming majority of regional leaders belong -- United Russia. Because recently the "Bears" have been experiencing difficulties in mayoral elections --much greater difficulties than in municipal council elections, where currently they successfully control the process. The recent changes to legislation prescribing a proportional majority system for elections at the local level specifically prohibit public organizations from submitting electoral lists (this right is retained only for parties) will make it easier for United Russia to control the local representative branch and, thus, citizens.

It is not hard to predict the future. City mayors -- the last bastion of elected authority in the country -- are going to lose influence. Most likely attempts will be made in the very near future (this does not even require changes to the legislation) to incorporate in the charters of big cities a provision whereby the mayor will be elected not by the population but by deputies.

In addition, according to our information, a discussion is currently taking place in the Kremlin about declaring the "capitals" of regions to be not municipalities, as now, but "administrative units." Like, for example, the districts in St. Petersburg, which had their own representative and executive bodies until 1993 but are now left with only district administration chiefs appointed by the governor. Such a scheme would make it possible to appoint the mayors of Russia's biggest cities.

Read More about Services from Alinga Consulting Group

Source: Novaya Gazeta