GOLD Report I - UCLG

MIDDLE EAST / WESTERN ASIA218United Cities and Local Governments38. ABDELGHENI IMAD,Municipal elections,Jarrous Press, p. 20.try, the state exercises three checks onlocal decisions: legal, financial and administrative.When this type of checking iscarried out a posteriori it is the sign of astate that is concerned about good localmanagement. On the other hand, checksconducted a priori entail the infringementon local autonomy; this is so, even whensome local authorities – particularly thosein Lebanon – who are faced with depletedresources, interpret it as a sign of protectionand guarantee.Taking a broader perspective, two fairlydistinct systems emerge in the region. InSaudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Oman, municipalitiesare branches of their controllingministry, though they occasionally functionas go-betweens. Elsewhere in the region,laws and regulations delineate a minimal,quasi-autonomous status for local authorities,albeit with significant political and financialconstraints.We have seen how much a priori financialmonitoring weighs heavily on the autonomyof municipalities, preventing them fromperforming their functions. Similarly, withthe exception of Turkey, municipal councildiscussions are also subject to a priori monitoringby the central government or byone of its representatives, such as the provincialgovernor in both Lebanon and Jordan.Technically, this monitoring of virtuallyall discussions may even be illegal in somecountries where it occurs routinely. Indeed,in Jordan and Lebanon, the constitutionsstate in almost identical terms that all localaffairs must be managed by the municipalcouncils. Yet in Lebanon, on average only20% of municipal council decisions areimmediately enforceable, 33% require theprior approval of the provincial or regionalgovernor, and 47% need approval from theMinistry of the Interior and the Municipalities38 .In a similar way, local councils in IslamicRepublic of Iran rely on the Higher ProvincialCouncil, an assembly of all the local representatives,to convey concerns to nationalauthorities. The Higher Provisional Councilis responsible for the monitoring and coordinationof the lesser councils. It also draftsbills that concern local authorities, and presentsthe bills to the National Assembly.In Turkey, on the other hand, central governmentsupervision has been reduced bythe latest reforms, with the provincialgovernor no longer having direct controlover council proceedings or their finances.His powers are now restricted to submittinga case to the administrative tribunalwhen there is a suspicion of malpractice. Inaddition, within the framework of a newmanagerial vision of municipal management,the new laws emphasize theimportance of a performance audit basedon modern audit methods, rather than on alegality oversight.The comparative administrative autonomy oflocal governments in Palestine is offset bysignificant fiscal control by the central government.Communication difficulties makecentralized administrative control impractical,but most financial resources flow downwardfrom the central authorities.In Syria, Islamic Republic of Iran and SaudiArabia, there is an additional administrativecheck in the form of an electoral systemrequiring that candidates for local posts beapproved by an ad hoc electoral committee;this could be called an ‘absolute apriori check’ since it takes place prior tothe discussions themselves.The security factor. The Palestinian Authority’sexclusive powers apply only to 20% of itsterritory (the category A areas, which aremainly urban), the rest being run jointly withIsrael or by Israel alone. As a result, themunicipalities only rarely see their decisions,whether about urban planning or tax collection,applied in their area. The use of lawenforcement personified by the PalestinianPolice is subject to the prior authorization ofIsrael, which retains control of the vast majorityof the rural areas. In addition, everythingto do with heavy infrastructures and land use